Cytological Diagnoses of Adenocarcinoma in situ of the Cervix: Common Misdiagnoses

Abstract

Objective: In routine screening, glandular lesions have high false-negative and false-positive rates. Our study sought to improve the cytological diagnoses and differentiation of glandular lesions. Study Design: A total of 24 cytology slides were retrospectively reviewed. Among these slides, 15 were confirmed via histology to have varying amounts of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) components. The other 9 cytology slides exhibited AIS mimics that had been originally considered to be AIS or atypical glandular cells (AGCs) and were selected for differentiation from AIS. Results: Overall, 12 of the 15 cytological slides exhibited significant atypical glandular features that met the criteria for AIS. However, the original cytological diagnoses included 2 cases of AIS, 3 AGCs-favor neoplasia (AGC-FN), 2 AGCs, 1 case that was not otherwise specified (AGC-NOS), 1 NILM (negative for intraepithelial lesion and malignancy), 3 HSILs (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions), and 2 ASC-Hs (atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude HSIL). The latter 9 cytological slides were subsequently histologically confirmed to be 2 metaplasias, 2 reactive lesions, 1 decidual change, 3 serous adenocarcinomas, and 1 SCNEC (small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma). Conclusion: Cytological screening will be valuable for identifying glandular lesions as effectively as squamous lesions if the doubly high false rates can be decreased.

Diagnostic distribution and pitfalls of glandular abnormalities in cervical cytology: a 25-year single-center study

“…Previous studies have identified the pitfalls of the AIS cytologic diagnosis, also its suboptimal accuracy and low levels of interobserver agreement [30][31][32]. Some authors have also reported that many AIS lesions could be interpreted as AGC, AGC-FN, ADC, or squamous intraepithelial lesions in cervical cytology [32,33].…”