Uropathology
Azadeh Rakhshan; Esmat Arvin; Sam Alahyari; Behrang Kazeminezhad; Tahmineh Mollasharifi; Alireza Bagheri; Fereshte Aliakbari; Seyed Jalil Hosseini; Mohammad Soleimani; Mahsa Ahadi; Elena Jamali; Afshin Moradi; Zahra Sadeghzadeh; Saleh Ghiasi; Malihe Nasiri; Farzad Allameh
Abstract
Background & Objective: The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (TPS) is a new method for evaluating urinary cytology designed to reduce unreproducible reports. The aim of this study was to reclassify and compare urinary cytology reports with TPS criteria to determine the frequency of unreproducible ...
Read More
Background & Objective: The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (TPS) is a new method for evaluating urinary cytology designed to reduce unreproducible reports. The aim of this study was to reclassify and compare urinary cytology reports with TPS criteria to determine the frequency of unreproducible reports compared to the previous system.Methods: In this study, the laboratory electronic registration system analyzed patients' urine samples taken by voided or washing and brushing methods. The cytological evaluation was performed considering the previous system and TPS by a pathologist. The results of the two systems were compared, and the sensitivity and specificity of TPS were calculated.Results: Urine samples were taken from 876 patients. The mean age of patients was 63.36 ± 12.62. Comparing the routine classification system and TPS, it was observed that the number of atypical reports in the TPS system decreased by 12%, and all of these cases were downgraded to the negative group in the new classification. The sensitivity and specificity of TPS were 29.4% and 95.1%, respectively, if suspected malignancy and positive reports for malignancy were considered. Finally, if positive reports for malignancy were selected, sensitivity and specificity changed to 11.8% and 100%, respectively.Conclusion: Although the TPS system has low sensitivity for the diagnosis of urothelial malignancies, due to its high specificity, it is possible to consider and use this classification for screening patients.
Endocrine Pathology
Elena Jamali; Behrang Kazeminezhad; Mahsa Ahadi; Afshin Moradi; Hamideh Khabbazi
Abstract
Background & Objective: Eosinophils are normally found in different parts of the gastrointestinal tract and with less prevalence in the esophagus. Eosinophilic infiltration is increased as part of inflammatory reactions in various diseases. The aim of this study was to determine the count and distribution ...
Read More
Background & Objective: Eosinophils are normally found in different parts of the gastrointestinal tract and with less prevalence in the esophagus. Eosinophilic infiltration is increased as part of inflammatory reactions in various diseases. The aim of this study was to determine the count and distribution of eosinophils in esophageal specimens obtained for different causes.Methods: Endoscopy and pathology reports of esophageal specimens in Shahid Beheshti University related hospitals, Tehran, Iran, were extracted from 2016 to 2019. The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), malignancy, eosinophilic esophagitis, and asymptomatic patients were determined as the percentages of total resection and biopsy specimens. Each group was calculated and randomly selected according to the inclusion criteria. All data were analyzed statistically using SPSS software.Results: A total of 258 biopsy and resection specimens were evaluated in this study. Fourty three cases (16.7%) diagnosed as normal esophageal mucosa , 42 cases (16.3%) as non-specific esophagitis, 155 cases (60.1%) diagnosed as gastroesophageal reflux disease, 4 cases (1.6%) showed malignancy and other diagnoses were recorded for 14 cases (5.4%). The numbers of eosinophils in the epithelium and lamina propria in the normal group were 0.1±0.5 and 2.08±2.33, respectively. The eosinophil count in different groups and its relation to different histopathologic findings were diverse.Conclusion: The number of eosinophils within the lamina propria was significantly higher than those found within other layers. . The highest mean eosinophil count was observed in the epithelium and the lamina propria of cases diagnosed as GERD.
