Introduction: The aim of this study was to perform an audit of oral and maxillofacial specimens submitted for cytological diagnosis to verify the importance of this complementary examination.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of our institutional cytopathology database was performed over an 18-year period. Clinical information and cytological data were collected. Associations between independent variables and outcomes were assessed using the Pearson χ2 test or Fisher's test, with a 5% significance level. When available, the histological diagnosis was compared with cytological diagnosis to identify the percentage of agreement and the specificity, sensitivity and accuracy of cytology in identifying malignant neoplasms.
Results: A total of 1082 cases were identified, which included 65 different cytological diagnoses. Exfoliative cytology (EC) was performed in 312 cases (29.1%) and fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in 770 cases (70.9%). EC was mainly employed to diagnose oral infectious diseases (P < 0.001) and FNAC to diagnose neoplasms, cystic, reactive and miscellaneous lesions (P < 0.001). Cell-block was performed in 555 FNAC cases (51.3%). Panoptic, Papanicolaou and haematoxylin-eosin staining were performed in FNAC and periodic acid-Schiff in EC (P < 0.001). In 211 cases (19.5%), the histological diagnosis was available and the percentage agreement with the cytological diagnosis was 41.2%. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy to identify malignant neoplasms were 84.6%, 100%, 100%, 77.8% and 90.0%, respectively.
Conclusions: EC was mainly performed for diagnosis of infectious diseases and FNAC for diagnosis of salivary gland tumours, odontogenic lesions, reactive lesions and cervical metastasis.
Keywords: cytopathology; exfoliative cytology; fine needle aspiration cytology; head and neck; oral cavity.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.