Journal of Cytology
Home About us Ahead of print Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online:383
  Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Thyroid bethesda atypia of undetermined significance or follicular lesion of undetermined significance (AUS/FLUS): A heterogenous group


1 Department of Pathology, Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Calcutta Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
2 Department of Endocrinology, Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Calcutta Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Correspondence Address:
Moumita Sengupta,
Flat No – A11, Snehaneer Apartment, 1185 Chakgaria, Kolkata - 700 094, West Bengal
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/JOC.JOC_160_18

Background: The Bethesda system of reporting thyroid cytopathology (BSRTC) was introduced in 2007. The third category of atypia of undetermined significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance (AUS/FLUS) poses difficulties for the pathologist, and different papers have been published varying the risks of malignancy. Aims: (1) Evaluation of the cytological features of thyroid lesions according to BSRTC. (2) After resection, correlation with histopathological report to evaluate the risk of malignancy (ROM) and the risk of neoplasm (RON). (3) Division of category III into six subgroups based on cytological findings and assessment of ROM and RON. Materials and Methods: A total of 282 patients with diagnosed thyroid lesions underwent fine-needle sampling under ultrasound guidance. Smears were prepared and stained with May–Grunwald–Giemsa stain and Papanicolaou stain. Results: Of 282 cases, there were 9 cases (3.1%) of category I, 157 cases (55.8%) of category II, 24 cases (8.5%) of category III, 20 cases (7.1%) of category IV, 14 cases (4.8%) of category V, and 58 cases (20.7%) of category VI. The RON was 60, 17.1, 63.1, 77.7, 91.7, and 98.2% and the ROM was 60, 14.3, 26.3, 38.9, 91.7, and 96.3% in categories I, II, III, IV, V, and VI, respectively. The RON was 0, 75, 50, 100, 66.6, and 100% and the ROM was 0, 25, 50, 100, 16.6, and 0% in subgroups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, respectively. We have proposed a system of subgrouping AUS/FLUS that may help to dispel the confusion generated by an AUS/FLUS report, and provide with a more exact and reproducible diagnostic and prognostic tool.



  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Maity P
    -  Jha AK
    -  Sengupta M
    -  Basu K
    -  Chatterjee U
    -  Ghosh S
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed30    
    PDF Downloaded3    

Recommend this journal