图片: | |
---|---|
名称: | |
描述: | |
以下是引用cqzhao在2010-6-1 11:36:00的发言:
Seldom to read the Pap cases here. Most cases did not have histologic follow-up. People can say what they want to say. There would be no final conclusion. From study point it is not very useful. Several clusters of cells show increased N/C ratio with prominent and irregular nuclei. At least I will call AGC or AGC-FN. Women should have endocervical and endometrial samplings. I once showed one case which looks like reactive change, but turned out to be an endocervical ca. I feel 白浪费了时间,很少朋友从这些病例中学习到了教训。 Priniciple: Pap test is a screening test. Several largest studies demonstrated that 70-80% women with AGC Pap turned out to be benign after endocervical or endometrial samplings. It can be repair or reactive change for above case. My question is that who can say definitely it is not a neoplastic lesion in this 50 year women. If we call AGC or AGC-FN and the final histologic finding is benign, it is fine (standard care). If you call benign Pap and finally the women has carcinoma, what will you do? Do not try hard to require all your cases of AGC Paps to be glandular neoplasams in histologic follow-up. If it is true that 100% of your agc cases are cervical or glandular neoplasms in histology in your practice. I can say you have missed many glandular lesions in your Pap evaluation. |
的确,我们对腺上皮病变的认识存在许多误区,需要不断提高。按照文献报道的发病率,我们肯定漏诊或误诊了很多腺上皮病变。但此例我不支持判读为腺上皮病变(无论从排列方式还是单个细胞特点,尽管它也成堆),哪怕赵老师拍我头
但也不是说这是例良性细胞学涂片,我们倾向的非典型性不成熟化生或修复,它在组织学上是良性病变,但细胞学还是判读为ASC-H,以此保证有阴道镜检查及活检。也就是说我们倾向是鳞状上皮病变而不是腺上皮病变,尽管病人50岁,至少这几张图片没看到腺上皮病变的明确证据。是这个意思。
另外:我们门诊宫颈活检基本都是“颈管掻刮+多点活检”,也经常看到颈管内有累腺的鳞状上皮病变而活检并未取到的病例。我不知道其它医院如何?也不知道我们门诊的处理是否规范?回头我要和她们沟通学习一下。如果判读为腺病变对这个病人多了个内膜活检,当然对疾病诊治有利。但50岁如果有子宫出血的话,临床一般就已经是内膜活检的指证。
以下是引用cqzhao在2010-6-1 11:36:00的发言:
Seldom to read the Pap cases here. Most cases did not have histologic follow-up. People can say what they want to say. There would be no final conclusion. From study point it is not very useful. Several clusters of cells show increased N/C ratio with prominent and irregular nuclei. At least I will call AGC or AGC-FN. Women should have endocervical and endometrial samplings. I once showed one case which looks like reactive change, but turned out to be an endocervical ca. I feel 白浪费了时间,很少朋友从这些病例中学习到了教训。 Priniciple: Pap test is a screening test. Several largest studies demonstrated that 70-80% women with AGC Pap turned out to be benign after endocervical or endometrial samplings. It can be repair or reactive change for above case. My question is that who can say definitely it is not a neoplastic lesion in this 50 year women. If we call AGC or AGC-FN and the final histologic finding is benign, it is fine (standard care). If you call benign Pap and finally the women has carcinoma, what will you do? Do not try hard to require all your cases of AGC Paps to be glandular neoplasams in histologic follow-up. If it is true that 100% of your agc cases are cervical or glandular neoplasms in histology in your practice. I can say you have missed many glandular lesions in your Pap evaluation. |
试译赵老师回帖,以方便大家学习
很少来这里回复巴氏涂片病例,因为多数病例都没有组织学随访结果,没有最终定论,想怎样评判都无所谓。从学习的角度来说,这没有价值。
此例中这几簇细胞显示N/C增高,核仁显著而不规则,至少我会判读为AGC or AGC-FN,以保证有宫颈及内膜的取样活检。我曾经发过一个看似反应性改变但最后却是宫颈癌的病例,看来“白浪费了时间,很少朋友从这些病例中学习到了教训。”
原则:巴氏试验是个筛查试验。几个大样本研究表明:70-80%的AGC涂片经宫颈或子宫内膜活检后都证实为良性病变。上述病例可能是修复或反应性改变,我的问题是谁能肯定这个50岁的老年女性她就不是肿瘤性病变?如果我们判读为AGC or AGC-FN,最后组织学活检是个良性,那很好(这是标准处理)。
如果你们称为良性涂片,但最后这是例癌,你怎么办?
不要强求所有AGC病例的组织学活检都是腺肿瘤,如果你真能保证100%AGC病例的组织学随访都是宫颈或腺肿瘤,那我要说:在巴氏涂片评估中,你肯定漏掉了很多腺上皮病变。
最近几天比较忙,上网也不是很方便;看到赵老师的回复让这个帖子热起来了,同时好让我们好好再次学习赵老师的思维方式。不过不由得五味杂陈。其实回顾赵老师等国外的专家在各种场合给我们灌输的几点,如果我理解不对,请赵老师纠正和补充。
1、宫颈细胞学是筛查,不是诊断的金标准。
2、宫颈细胞学跟组织学在于其敏感性,而组织学在其特异性;这事他们的互补性。所以在宫颈细胞学上的判读防止漏诊比起准确性更为重要。
3、即使细胞学和组织学结果不一致,我们可以等最终病人结果(不等于第一次活检结果)出来总结细胞学和组织学的判读是否准确,不一致的原因和我们认识上的误区。
4、国内整个细胞学的水平跟国外有很大的差距;请赵老师等国外专家多来我们论坛指点和点评病例;让我们少犯点错误;多学习学习您们的思维和处理方式。同时请您等国外的专家多给点时间我们成长;您的时间不会白费;我们等会好好学习的其中的教训和误区。尤其青青姐姐学习最认真;她每次都帮我们翻译或我翻译不好的都是她帮忙纠正的;如果她没有学好,您应该敲她的头;让她快点成长带着我们一起成长(开个玩笑)。
最后,再次谢谢丁老师提供的好病例和赵老师的回复和点评;同时感谢所有参与这个病案和阅读这个病案的网友;我们的论坛都是靠大家努力挣来的人气!
以下是引用青青子矜在2010-6-1 14:29:00的发言:
试译赵老师回帖,以方便大家学习 很少来这里回复巴氏涂片病例,因为多数病例都没有组织学随访结果,没有最终定论,想怎样评判都无所谓。从学习的角度来说,这没有价值。 此例中这几簇细胞显示N/C增高,核仁显著而不规则,至少我会判读为AGC or AGC-FN,以保证有宫颈及内膜的取样活检。我曾经发过一个看似反应性改变但最后却是宫颈癌的病例,看来“白浪费了时间,很少朋友从这些病例中学习到了教训。” 原则:巴氏试验是个筛查试验。几个大样本研究表明:70-80%的AGC涂片经宫颈或子宫内膜活检后都证实为良性病变。上述病例可能是修复或反应性改变,我的问题是谁能肯定这个50岁的老年女性她就不是肿瘤性病变?如果我们判读为AGC or AGC-FN,最后组织学活检是个良性,那很好(这是标准处理)。 如果你们称为良性涂片,但最后这是例癌,你怎么办? 不要强求所有AGC病例的组织学活检都是腺肿瘤,如果你真能保证100%AGC病例的组织学随访都是宫颈或腺肿瘤,那我要说:在巴氏涂片评估中,你肯定漏掉了很多腺上皮病变。 |
我终于看明白了赵老师的良苦用心。谢谢赵老师!!
青青子衿!!谢谢!!非常感谢!!辛苦了!!