Introduction: The thyroid gland is arguably the fastest growing anatomic site for fine needle aspiration (FNA). With the increase of thyroid cases, a reevaluation of cytotechnologist screening quality metrics in terms of thyroid FNA is called for. We present our institutional cytotechnologist performance at screening for nuclear atypia by applying established quality metrics. Materials and Methods: Information on 8,814 consecutive thyroid cytopathology cases over a 10-year period was retrieved from computerized records. A subsample of cases categorized either as atypia of uncertain significance with nuclear atypia or suspicious for malignancy with features suspicious for papillary thyroid carcinoma. The cytotechnologist and cytopathologist diagnoses were compared using step discrepancies and Δ-ratios. Results: Overall discrepancy between the cytotechnologist and cytopathologist diagnoses existed in <10% of all thyroid cases. One-category discrepancies were the most common (7.8%), while two-category discrepancies were rare (0.5%). The one-category discrepancy rate correlated with cytotechnologist experience. One-category undercalls were twice as common as overcalls (5.3 vs. 2.5%, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: We identified a high level of quality in the screening for nuclear atypia in thyroid FNA. The one-category discrepancy rate is suited to tracking individual cytotechnologist performance, identifies outliers and appears to correlate with cytotechnologist experience.

Keywords:
Thyroid gland, Fine needle aspiration, Nuclear atypia, Papillary thyroid carcinoma, Cytotechnologist screening
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.