Skip to main content

Role of FNAC in diagnosis of parotid lesions

Abstract

Background

Salivary gland masses are considered challenging for diagnosis regarding its origin and whether benign or malignant. Unique features of FNAC as a safe and easy diagnostic procedure with little discomfort to the patient made it a favorable primary diagnostic tool. Information regarding the nature of parotid lesions whether being benign or malignant is the main objective of FNAC. We have done a restrospective study for FNAC for parotid masses performed in John Hunter hospital (Newcastle, NSW, Australia) along the peroid from 2014-2018. Histopathological correlation was done in 74 cases to test the accuracy of FNAC in diagnosis of parotid lesions.

Results

Of the total 74 FNAC done for parotid lesions in which a histopathological correlation was done, we get 46 (62.2%) benign lesions (37 neoplastic and 9 non-neoplastic) while 28 (37.8%) were malignant tumor. Pleomorphic adenoma was the most common in benign tumor side (45.7%) while SCC is the most common in malignant group (53.6%). Compatibility between FNAC and histological diagnosis was found in 74% (55/74), of which 78.3% in benign lesions (36/46) and in 68% of malignant lesions (19/28). FNA cytology was true positive in 21/74 cases (28.4%) and true negative in 41/74 (55.4%) cases. We have 5 (6.8%) false-negative and 7 (9.5%) false-positive results. As a result, we get sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 85%, and accuracy of 84%.

Conclusion

The role of FNAC in diagnosis of primary salivary gland pathology is considered with some debate about sensitivity/specificity; however, sometimes it should be repeated or correlated with clinical/histopathological confirmation.

Background

Salivary gland masses are considered challenging for diagnosis regarding its origin whether being benign or malignant. They usually affect parotid, submandibular, sublingual, and minor salivary glands in descending order. Parotid accounts for 3% of all head and neck and 0.6% of all tumors of human body [1].

Parotid tumors are mostly benign (85%), mostly of pleomorphic adenoma type, while mucoepidermoid carcinoma is the most common malignant tumor. Other causes of parotid masses such as metastatic cancers, inflammatory conditions, and lymphoma may also cause parotid gland masses [2, 3]. Histopathological examination offers the final definitive diagnosis of tumor types after surgical resection in spite of risks and complications associated with parotidectomy. So, a less invasive reliable method of diagnosis is therefore often preferred, which can help with management.

Since 1920s, the concept of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) started where it came into use simultaneously in Europe and the USA [4, 5]. FNAC is a diagnostic tool based on the morphological findings of individual or group of cells obtained using a needle [6]. This procedure was further developed in the 1950s and 1960s by the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm [7] and the Institut Curie in Paris [8]; then, it was popular in the 1970s. Nevertheless, Batsakis et al. [9] argued that parotid masses require surgery and that the preoperative FNAC has had little impact on clinical management. Other authors consider FNAC as a superior diagnostic tool compared to the combination of physical examination and radiological evaluation [10, 11], which cannot distinguish reliably between benign and malignant lesions. FNAC is a relatively painless, quick, and minimally invasive procedure that is usually conducted in the outpatient setting [12]. It is easy to perform and feasible with few contraindications. The only limitation is that it has been associated with variable sensitivity and specificity in differentiating malignant from benign disease. Moreover, high rates of non-diagnostic aspirations have been reported in the literature [13]. An open biopsy is another option that is not preferred because of the risk of tumor spillage, facial nerve injury, scarring, and fistula formation [6]. Currently, ultrasound-guided core biopsies (USCBs) have been described as a very reasonable option [14,15,16,17,18]. The use of large bore needles in core biopsies has been associated with tumor seeding along the needle tract in literature [19,20,21] making FNA a more convenient option.

Methods

We have done a restrospective study for FNAC for parotid masses performed in John Hunter hospital (Newcastle, NSW, Australia) along the peroid from 2014-2018. Histopathological correlation was done in 74 cases to test the accuracy of FNAC in diagnosis of parotid lesions.

FNAC was performed by a cytopathologist using a 23-gauge fine needle attached to a 10-ml plastic syringe and employing a Cameco gun. Slides were air dried for Diff-Quik staining, and an on-site, provisional cytopathologic diagnosis was rendered on all slides. Additional smears were prepared and fixed immediately in 95% ethanol for subsequent Papanicolaou staining. In some cases, needle rinses with balanced salt solution were used to make paraffin cell blocks, and 4-m thin sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin.

Histological correlation of FNAC results with surgical specimen was done to confirm accuracy of cytological diagnosis.

Results

A total of 74 FNAC done for parotid lesions in which a histopathological correlation was done were reviewed in Table 1.

Table 1 Cytological diagnosis and final histological diagnosis

We get 46 (62.2%) benign lesions (37 neoplastic and 9 non neoplastic) while 28 (37.8%) were malignant tumors (Table 1). Pleomorphic adenoma was the most common in benign tumor side (45.7%) while SCC is the most common in malignant group (53.6%) (Table 1).

Compatibility between FNAC and histological diagnosis was found in 74% (55/74), of which 78.3% in benign lesions (36/46) and in 68% of malignant lesions (19/28) (Table 1).

FNA cytology was true positive in 21/74 cases (28.4%) and true negative in 41/74 (55.4%) cases. We have 5 (6.8%) false-negative and 7 (9.5%) false-positive results (Table 2).

Table 2 FNAC and histological results for diagnosis of malignancy

As a result, we get sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 85%, and accuracy of 84% as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 FNAC results

Discussion

FNAC is a reliable diagnostic procedure with little discomfort to the patient. So, it is considered a useful diagnostic tool to differentiate between benign and malignant tumors of parotid masses. However, definite tumor type and grading is achieved through final histological examination.

The accuracy of FNAC depends on important factors like the experience of the clinician performing the procedure in addition to the experience of the pathologist in assessing the cytological sample. Inadequate cellularity or smears have been reported in 2 to 10% of cases in literature [22, 23], which can be explained by needle insertion outside the target tissue or because of necrosis, hemorrhage, or cystic areas in the tumor. So, repeating the sampling may be a good option to obtain more information [24].

Fakhry et al. has made a review that showed FNAC sensitivity ranging from 54 to 92% and a specificity ranging from 86 to 100%, compared to his own study that showed a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 89% [25]. Another review done by Zbaren et al. mentioned that the accuracy ranged between 84 and 97%, while the sensitivity range was from 54 to 95%, and specificity ranged from 86 to 100%. On the other hand, study showed the accuracy 84%, sensitivity 64%, and specificity 95% [26].

Our study illustrated a sensitivity of 81%, a specificity of 85%, and an accuracy of 84%, in compatible with Stewart et al. that showed overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92%, 100%, and 98% respectively [27], while Naeem et al. showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 84%, 98%, and 84–97% respectively [28]. Along Suzuki et al.’s study, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated as 82.3%, 98.7%, and 95.9% respectively [29]. Altin et al. showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 68.96%, 89.63%, and 86.52% [30]. Feinstein et al. showed sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 95.1% [31].

In our study, the most common benign tumor was pleomorphic adenoma while the most common malignant was squamous cell carcinoma in compatible with Bachar et al. [32]. However, Naeem et al. [28] and Altin et al. [30] reported mucoepidermoid carcinoma as the most common malignant tumor.

The overall concordance between FNAC and histology was 74% (55/74 cases) of which 78.3% (36/46) were benign cases and 68% (19/28) were malignant cases; this is slightly closer to the results obtained by Zbaren et al. [26] that showed 84% (benign) and 49% (malignant), while lower than results shown by Naeem et al. [28] which were 85% (total), 88% (benign), and 78% (malignant), and Al-Khafaji et al. [33] with 92% (benign) and 84% (malignant).

False-negative results were 6.8% close to the results obtained by Zurrida et al. [10] and other studies [26, 34, 35] but higher than results obtained by Naeem et al. [28], which is considered a problem so all parotid masses clinically suspected for malignancy with a non-diagnostic or negative finding on FNAC which required re-aspiration or a parotidectomy with frozen-section diagnosis must be performed [26].

False-positive results were reported 9.5% as high as compared to other studies ranging from 0 to 7% [26] and 10–12% [33, 36].

Conclusion

The role of FNAC in the diagnosis of primary salivary gland pathology is considered with some debate about sensitivity/specificity; however, it should be correlated with clinical/histopathological confirmation.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

FNAC:

Fine needle aspiration cytology

SCC:

Squamous cell carcinoma

References

  1. 1.

    Hugo NE, McKinney P, Griffith BH (1973) Management of tumors of the parotid gland. Surg Clin North Am 53(1):105–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-6109(16)39936-4

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Ali NS, Akhtar S, Junaid M, Awan S, Aftab K (2011) Diagnostic accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology in parotid lesions. ISRN Surg 721525

  3. 3.

    Mavec P, Eneroth CM, Franzen S, Moberger G, Zajıcek J (1964) Aspiration biopsy of salivary gland tumours. Correlation of cytologic reports from 652 aspiration biopsies with clinical and histologic findings. Acta Otolaryngol 58(1-6):471–484. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016486409121406

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Dudheon LS, Patrick CV (1927) A new method for the rapid microscopical diagnosis of tumors. Br J Surg 15(58):250–261

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Martin HE, Ellis EB (1930) Biopsy by needle puncture and aspiration. Ann Surg 92(2):169–181. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-193008000-00002

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    McGuirt WF, McCabe BF (1978) Significance of node biopsy before definitive treatment of cervical metastatic carcinoma. Laryngoscope 88(4):594–597. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.1978.88.4.594

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Mavec P, Eneroth CM, Franzen S, Moberger G, Zajicek J (1964) Aspiration biopsy of salivary gland tumors. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 58(1-6):471–484. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016486409121406

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bonneau H, Sommer D (1959) L’orientation du diagnositc des tumeurs salivaires par la ponction a’ l’aiguille fine. Pathol Biol 7:786–791

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Batsakis JG, Sueige N, el-Naggar AK (1992) Fine-needle aspiration of salivary glands: its utility and tissue effects. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 101(2):185–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348949210100215

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Zurrida S, Alasio L, Tradati N, Bartoli C, Chiesa F, Pilotti S (1993) Fine-needle aspiration of parotid masses. Cancer 72(8):2306–2311. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19931015)72:8<2306::AID-CNCR2820720804>3.0.CO;2-E

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Owen EERTC, Banerjee AK, Prichard AJN, Hudson EA, Kark AE (1989) Role of fine-needle aspiration cytology and computed tomography in the diagnosis of parotid swellings. Br J Surg 76(12):1273–1274. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800761217

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Qizilbash AH, Sianos J, Young JE, Archibald SD (1985) Fine needle aspiration biopsy cytology of major salivary glands. Acta Cytol 29(4):503–512

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Schmidt RL, Hall BJ, Wilson AR, Layfield LJ (2011) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology for parotid gland lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 136(1):45–59. https://doi.org/10.1309/AJCPOIE0CZNAT6SQ

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Breeze J, Andi A, Williams MD, Howlett DC (2009) The use of fine needle core biopsy under ultrasound guidance in the diagnosis of a parotid mass. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 47(1):78–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2008.04.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Tighe D, Haldar S, Mandalia U, Skelton E, Ramesar K, Williams M, Howlett D (2014) Diagnostic investigation of parotid neoplasms: a 14 year experience of freehand fine needle aspiration cytology and ultrasound guided core needle biopsy. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 52(8):e66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.07.074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Huang YC, Wu CT, Lin G, Chuang WY, Yeow KM, Wan YL (2012) Comparison of ultrasonographically guided fine-needle aspiration and core needle biopsy in the diagnosis of parotid masses. J Clin Ultrasound 40(4):189–194. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.20873

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Haldar S, Mandalia U, Skelton E, Chow V, Turner SS, Ramesar K, Tighe D, Williams M, Howlett D (2015) Diagnostic investigation of parotid neoplasms: a 16-year experience of freehand fine needle aspiration cytology and ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44(2):151–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.09.025

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kesse KW, Manjaly G, Violaris N, Howlett DC (2002) Ultrasound-guided biopsy in the evaluation of focal lesions and diffuse swelling of the parotid gland. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40(5):384–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-4356(02)00189-4

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Roussel F, Dalion J, Benozio M (1989) The risk of tumoral seeding in needle biopsies. Acta Cytol 33(6):936–939

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Roussel F, Nouvet G (1995) Evaluation of large-needle biopsy for the diagnosis of cancer. Acta Cytol 39(3):449–452

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Yamaguchi KT, Strong MS, Shapshay SM, Soto E (1979) Seeding of parotid carcinoma along Vim-Silverman needle tract. J Otolaryngol 8(1):49–52

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Guyot JP, Obradovic D, Krayenbuhl M, Zbaeren P, Lehmann W (1990) Fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of head and neck growths: is it necessary? Otolarnygol Head Neck Surg 103(5):697–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/019459989010300506

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Smith Frable MA, Frable WJ (1991) Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of salivary glands. Laryngoscope 101:245–249

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Filipoulos E, Angeli S, Daskalopoulon D, Kelessis N, Vassilopoulos P (1998) Pre-operative evaluation of parotid tumours by fine-needle biopsy. Eur J Surg Oncol 24(3):180–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0748-7983(98)92895-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Fakhry N, Antonini F, Michel J, Penicaud M, Mancini J, Lagier A, Santini L, Turner F, Chrestian MA, Zanaret M, Dessi P, Giovanni A (2012) Fine-needle aspiration cytology in the management of parotid masses: evaluation of 249 patients. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 129(3):131–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2011.10.008

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Zbaren P et al (2001) Value of fine-needle aspiration cytology of parotid gland masses. Laryngoscope 111

  27. 27.

    Stewart CJ et al (2000) Fine-needle aspiration cytology of salivary gland: a review of 341 cases. Diagn Cytopathol 22(3):139–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0339(20000301)22:3<139::AID-DC2>3.0.CO;2-A

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Naeem SA, Shabbir A et al (2011) Diagnostic accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology in parotid lesions. Int Sch Res Netw Surg 2011:5

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Suzuki M, Kawata R et al (2018) Values of fine-needle aspiration cytology of parotid gland tumors: a review of 996 cases at a single institution. Head Neck:1–8

  30. 30.

    Altin F, Alimoglu Y, Acikalin RM, Yasar H (2019) Is fine needle aspiration biopsy reliable in the diagnosis of parotid tumors? Comparison of preoperative and postoperative results and the factors affecting accuracy. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 85(3):275–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2018.04.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Feinstein AJ, Alonso J et al (2016) Diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration for parotid and submandibular gland lesions. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 155(3)

  32. 32.

    Bachar G, Shkedy Y et al Fine needle aspiration cytology for parotid lesions, can we avoid surgery? https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.13038.2016

  33. 33.

    Al-Khafaji BM, Nestok BR, Katz LR (1998) Fine needle aspiration of 154 parotid masses with histologic correlation. Cancer 84(3):153–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980625)84:3<153::AID-CNCR6>3.0.CO;2-P

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Atula T, Greénman R, Laippala P, Klemi PJ (1995) Fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of parotid gland lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 15:185–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Pitts DB, Hilsinger RL, Karandy E, Ross JL, Caro JE (1992) Fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of salivary gland disorders in the community hospital setting. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 118(5):479–482. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1992.01880050025005

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Seifert G (1991) Histological typing of salivary gland tumors. In: World Health Organization International Histological Classification of Tumours. Springer, Geneva. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-84506-2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgments are applicable.

Funding

Not applicable, no financial disclosure

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors have read and approved the manuscript. AY: corresponding author. DC: surgical data. SA, MZ, AT: planning and organization of article by reviewing data and doing literature review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed Youssef.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by John Hunter Hospital along with the approval of the data protection committee in April 2019. In addition to Alexandria Faculty of Medicine Ethics Committee in August 2019, reference no. 00018890. Consent to participate is not applicable as it is a retrospective study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Youssef, A., Cope, D., Alsedra, S. et al. Role of FNAC in diagnosis of parotid lesions. Egypt J Otolaryngol 37, 47 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43163-021-00096-8

Download citation