Survey of cytopathologists and cytotechnologists for the clinical impact of the use of atypia or follicular lesion of undetermined significance.

Abstract

Background:The cytologic diagnosis of atypia of undetermined significance or follicular lesion of undetermined significance (AUS/FLUS) is controversial because of variation in how it is applied in practice, as well as uncertainty about patient management. We aimed to assess the percentage of thyroid fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNABs) with AUS/FLUS diagnoses in different North American and European practice settings (e.g. community, academic, etc.), assess whether patients were managed according to current guidelines, and determine patient outcomes.Materials and Methods:A detailed questionnaire survey was posted in secure websites used separately by cytopathologists and cytotechnologists. The questionnaire was posted from August 1 through December 31, 2013.Results:Endocrinologists and cytopathologists performed 51.7% and 37.1% of thyroid FNABs, respectively. The Bethesda reporting system for thyroid FNAB was used in 90% of practices. The rate of AUS/FLUS varied widely among institutions, with 46.1% of represented institutions reporting AUS/FLUS rates of 3–10%. The median follow-up rate of patients with an initial AUS/FLUS diagnosis was 70% (range, 10–100%). For the majority of represented institutions (86.4%), patients with initial AUS/FLUS diagnosis had follow-up with endocrinologists. Of repeat AUS/FLUS thyroid FNABs, a median of 52% was considered benign, and 18% were suspicious of or positive for malignancy (median, 10% and 7.5%, respectively).Conclusions:Reporting of the AUS/FLUS category varied widely among different institutions. The median follow-up rate was lower than published guidelines. The most common follow-up diagnosis was benign thyroid nodule. Improved standardization of cytologic criteria should be adopted to reduce such variation.