Display options
Share it on

Sarcoma. 1998;2(3):155-61. doi: 10.1080/13577149877911.

Fine-needle aspiration cytology of soft tissue sarcoma: benefits and limitations.

Sarcoma

M Akerman

Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology and Cytology University Hospital Lund S-221 85 Sweden.

PMID: 18521248 PMCID: PMC2395402 DOI: 10.1080/13577149877911

Abstract

Purpose. Examine the benefits and limitations of fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNA) used as the definitive diagnostic method before treatment.Method. Review of the 25 year experience at a multidisciplinary musculo-skeletal centre where FNA is the primary diagnostic approach to soft tissue sarcoma in the extremities and trunk wall and the experience of various experts in the field.Results. FNA has several benefits compared with coarse needle or open surgical biopsy. The most important are rapid preliminary diagnosis, no need for hospitalization and anaesthesia, negligible complications and fear for tumour cell spread. With the collected experience gained during the years a reliable diagnosis of sarcoma is the rule in general and specific-type diagnoses are possible in many histotypes, especially when the cytologic examination is supplemented with ancillary diagnostics. The most important limitations are inability to hit small deep-seated sarcoma and some diagnostic pitfalls such as the correct diagnosis of spindle cell neoplasms, variants of benign lipomatous tumours and 'new soft tissue tumour entities'.Discussion. Optimal use of FNA calls for certain requirements such as centralization, experience in soft tissue tumour cytology-histopathology, the FNA technique and close co-operation between the orthopaedic surgeon and cytopathologist.

References

  1. Acta Orthop Scand. 1985 Oct;56(5):407-12 - PubMed
  2. Acta Cytol. 1992 Nov-Dec;36(6):905-17 - PubMed
  3. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;10(3):232-40; discussion 241 - PubMed
  4. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1997 Feb;273:4-8 - PubMed
  5. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand A. 1981 Jul;89(4):285-91 - PubMed
  6. Acta Cytol. 1980 Mar-Apr;24(2):137-44 - PubMed
  7. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1986 Nov;3(4):317-44 - PubMed
  8. Diagn Cytopathol. 1988;4(4):352-5 - PubMed
  9. APMIS. 1992 May;100(5):437-48 - PubMed
  10. Acta Cytol. 1981 May-Jun;25(3):215-23 - PubMed
  11. Hum Pathol. 1985 Jan;16(1):6-18 - PubMed
  12. Acta Cytol. 1986 Nov-Dec;30(6):671-8 - PubMed
  13. Acta Orthop Scand. 1987 Oct;58(5):523-8 - PubMed
  14. Acta Orthop Scand. 1981 Jun;52(3):287-93 - PubMed
  15. Diagn Cytopathol. 1992;8(5):465-74 - PubMed
  16. Acta Cytol. 1982 May-Jun;26(3):376-7 - PubMed
  17. Diagn Cytopathol. 1993 Dec;9(6):632-8 - PubMed
  18. Diagn Cytopathol. 1986 Jan-Mar;2(1):46-54 - PubMed
  19. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1995 Oct 1;84(1):27-31 - PubMed
  20. Acta Cytol. 1996 May-Jun;40(3):607-8 - PubMed
  21. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand A. 1986 Nov;94(6):363-9 - PubMed
  22. Diagn Cytopathol. 1991;7(3):293-8 - PubMed
  23. Am J Clin Pathol. 1996 Nov;106(5):620-4 - PubMed
  24. Acta Orthop Scand. 1989 Aug;60(4):457-60 - PubMed
  25. Diagn Cytopathol. 1996 Jul;15(1):17-22 - PubMed
  26. Acta Cytol. 1984 May-Jun;28(3):337-45 - PubMed
  27. Cancer. 1997 Aug 25;81(4):228-37 - PubMed
  28. Diagn Cytopathol. 1986 Sep;2(3):244-7 - PubMed
  29. Diagn Cytopathol. 1987 Dec;3(4):295-302 - PubMed

Publication Types