Objective: To compare the recently proposed Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) with the four-tiered reporting system (FTRS) followed at our institute. Methods: Parotid gland fine-needle aspirates reported over a period of 5 years were analysed. These aspirates had been placed into 4 categories according to the FTRS: unsatisfactory (UNS), no evidence of malignancy/negative (NEG), inconclusive for malignancy (INC), and diagnostic for malignancy/positive (POS). Aspirates with follow-up histopathology were then categorized according to the MSRSGC as follows: non-diagnostic, non-neoplastic, atypia of unde-termined significance (AUS), neoplasm, suspicious for malignancy, and malignant. The risk of malignancy (ROM) was calculated. Results: A total of 893 parotid region aspirates were evaluated and histopathology was available for 190 cases (21%). ROM in MSRSGC groups, namely non-diagnostic, non-neoplastic, AUS, neoplasm, suspicious for malignant neoplasm, and malignant, was 44, 8, 0, 12, 81 and 100%, respectively. ROM in FTRS groups, namely UNS, NEG, INC, and POS, was 45, 13, 67 and 100%, respectively. Conclusions: MSRGC and FTRS are comparable with respect to the ROM across groups. Compared to FTRS, the further subcategorisation of the non-malignant group, the use of specific nomenclature, and the reproducibility of MSRGC provide proper risk stratification, thereby guiding better management and resulting in improved patient care.

Keywords:
Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology, Parotid gland, Cytology, Risk stratification
1.
Frable MAS, Frable WJ: Fine-needle aspiration biopsy revisited. Laryngoscope 1982; 92: 1414–1418.
2.
Lussier C, Klijanienko J, Vielh P: Fine-needle aspiration of metastatic non-lymphomatous tumors to the major salivary glands: a clinicopathologic study of 40 cases cytologically diagnosed and histologically correlated. Cancer 2000; 90: 350–356.
3.
O’Dwyer P, Farrar WB, James AG, Finkelmeir W, McCabe DP: Needle aspiration biopsy of major gland tumors. Its value. Cancer 1986; 57: 554–557.
4.
Balakrishnan K, Mcmahon J, Imric J, Feeley KM, Parker AJ, Bull PD: Fine needle aspiration cytology in the management of a parotid mass: a two centre retrospective study. Surgeon 2005; 3: 2: 67–72.
5.
Hartimath B, Kudva A, Singh Rathore A: Role of fine-needle aspiration cytology in swellings of the parotid region. Indian J Surg 2011; 73: 19–23.
6.
Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O’Connor D, Prey M, et al; Forum Group Members; Bethesda 2001 Workshop: The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002; 287: 2114–2119.
7.
Baloch ZW, LiVolsi VA, Asa SL, Rosai J, Merino MJ, Randolph G, et al: Diagnostic terminology and morphologic criteria for cytologic diagnosis of thyroid lesions: a synopsis of the National Cancer Institute Thyroid Fine-Needle Aspiration State of the Science Conference. Diagn Cytopathol 2008; 36: 425–437.
8.
Pitman MB, Centeno BA, Ali SZ, Genevay M, Stelow E, Mino-Kenudson M, et al: Standardized terminology and nomenclature for pancreatobiliary cytology: the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology guidelines. Diagn Cytopathol 2014; 42: 338–350.
9.
Layfield LJ, Baloch Z, Elsheikh T, Litzky L, Rekhtman N, Travis WD, et al: Standardized terminology and nomenclature for respiratory cytology: The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology guidelines. Diagn Cytopathol 2016; 44: 399–409.
10.
Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DFI (eds): The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Cham, Springer, 2016, pp 5–114.
11.
Baloch ZW, Faquin WC, Layfield LJ: Is it time to develop a tiered classification scheme for salivary gland fine-needle aspiration specimens? Diagn Cytopathol 2017; 45: 285–286.
12.
Wei S, Layfield LJ, LiVolsi VA, Montone KT, Baloch ZW: Reporting of fine needle aspiration (FNA) specimens of salivary gland lesions: a comprehensive review. Diagn Cytopathol 2017; 45: 820–827.
13.
Faquin WC, Rossi ED (eds): The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology. Cham, Springer, 2018.
14.
Ali NS, Akhtar S, Junaid M, Awan S, Aftab K: Diagnostic accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology in parotid lesions. ISRN Surg 2011; 2011: 721525.
15.
Esroz C, Uguz AH, Tuncer U, Soylu L, Kiroglu M: Fine needle aspiration cytology of the salivary glands: a twelve years’ experience. Aegean Pathol J 2004; 1: 51–56.
16.
Piccioni LO, Fabiano B, Gemma M, Sarandria D, Bussi M: Fine-needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of parotid lesions. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2011; 31: 1–4.
17.
Mairembam P, Jay A, Beale T et al: Salivary gland FNA cytology: role as a triage tool and an approach to pitfalls in cytomorphology. Cytopathology 2016; 27: 91–96.
18.
Rohilla M, Singh P, Rajwanshi A, et al: Three-year cytohistological correlation of salivary gland FNA cytology at a tertiary center with the application of the Milan system for risk stratification. Cancer Cytopathol 2017; 125: 767–775.
19.
Thiryayi SA, Low YX, Shelton D, Narine N, Slater D, Rana DN: A retrospective 3-year study of salivary gland FNAC with categorisation using the Milan reporting system. Cytopathology 2018, E-pub ahead of print.
20.
Layfield LJ, Baloch Z, Hirschowitz SL, Rossi ED: Impact on clinical follow-up of the Milan System for Salivary Gland Cytology: a comparison with a traditional diagnostic classification. Cytopathology 2018, E-pub ahead of print.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
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.