Premium
Reporting fine‐needle aspirates of breast: A survey of preferences among surgeons
Author(s) -
Mooney Eoghan E.,
Seigler Hilliard F.,
Layfield Lester J.
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
diagnostic cytopathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.417
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1097-0339
pISSN - 8755-1039
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1097-0339(199810)19:4<317::aid-dc20>3.0.co;2-p
Subject(s) - medicine , fine needle aspiration cytology , preference , breast cancer , fine needle aspiration , cytology , radiology , general surgery , surgery , biopsy , cancer , pathology , economics , microeconomics
Background The optimal format for reporting results of breast fine‐needle aspiration cytology is controversial, with some experts favoring a five‐category system and others recommending a four‐category format. Methods A survey of 200 surgeons was performed to determine their preference for a four‐ or five‐category report format. They were also questioned concerning the number of patients per year in whom they diagnosed breast cancer, if they used fine‐needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) regularly, and why they favored one category over the other. Results Eighty‐five complete responses were received. Fifty‐eight percent of these surgeons (49) routinely used FNAC for the diagnosis of breast nodules. There was no strong preference for either report format. Twenty‐four of 49 routine users of FNAC favored a four‐category format, and another four had no preference. Conclusion Surgeons who routinely used FNAC in the diagnosis of breast disease do not have a preference for the five‐category probabilistic system. Diagn. Cytopathol. 1998;19:317–320. © 1998 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.