Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025
DIPLOMA Approach for Standardized Pathology Assessment of Distal Pancreatectomy Specimens
Published on: February 1, 2020
Reporting Pancreatic FNAC using the Papanicolaou System: Still a Diagnostic Challenge
Parul Verma1, Saloni Goyal1, Ruchita Tyagi1
1Department of Pathology, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Introduction:
The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology System for reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytology (PSCPC) is a reliable method to classify pancreatic fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) smears. However, it is not without practical problems which can diminish the diagnostic accuracy of the cytological diagnosis.
Aims And Objectives:
To determine the diagnostic pitfalls while reporting cytomorphology of pancreatic lesions according to PSCPC on correlating FNAC findings with histopathology.
Materials And Methods:
Retrospective analysis of pancreatic FNAC smears received in the Department of Pathology of our tertiary care institute over a period of 2 years was done. The cytological diagnoses were classified according to the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology system of reporting pancreaticobiliary cytology and correlated with histopathology. The reasons of cyto-histological discordance were analyzed.
Results:
Out of 50 cases in which both FNAC and biopsy of pancreatic lesions were done, 34 cases were positive/malignant (Category VI), eight cases were suspicious for malignancy (Category V), three cases were neoplastic (Category IV), two cases were atypical (Category III), two cases were negative for malignancy (Category II), and one case was non-diagnostic (Category I). Out of 50 cases, histopathology was non-diagnostic due to inadequate material in six cases. The cytological diagnoses were compared with histopathology in the remaining 44 cases. Categories III, IV V, and VI were considered as positive for neoplastic pathology. The sensitivity of FNAC to predict neoplastic pathology was 97.5%, while the specificity was 25%. The positive predictive value was 92.9%. Two cases reported as atypical (Category III) turned out to be adenocarcinoma on histopathology. One case reported as neuroendocrine tumor and two cases reported as adenocarcinoma on cytology displayed features of chronic pancreatitis on histology. One case reported as neoplastic mucinous cyst (Category IV) turned out to be adenocarcinoma on histology (limited concordance).
Conclusion:
The cytopathologist needs to be wary of the potential pitfalls to improve the diagnostic accuracy of FNACs.
