Grapsa Dimitra
Cytopathology Department, Areteion University Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Diagn Cytopathol. 2013 Oct;41(10):917-21. doi: 10.1002/dc.22927. Epub 2013 Apr 26.
Since the success of the Bethesda nomenclature system in standardizing Pap smear results, there has been growing interest in adopting Bethesda-like standardized categorical formats in areas of nongynecologic cytopathology. Standardized categorical reporting may have several advantages over descriptive reporting, in enhancing cytopathologist-clinician communication and inter-institutional exchange of information, providing better guidance for treatment planning, and facilitating statistical analysis for research purposes or quality control studies. On the other hand, descriptive reporting may be more effective as a tool of communication between cytopathologists, may better express the uncertainty of the observer in diagnostically difficult and equivocal cases and may better serve the purposes of training and continuing education of cytopathologists. Future studies on the pros and cons of the different reporting systems used in cytopathology may provide further insight on these issues. The most problematic areas need to be identified and optimal solutions decided. Despite the ongoing debate on the optimal reporting format in cytopathology, there is general agreement on the need for high quality cytology reports (whether descriptive or standardized) in terms of their diagnostic accuracy, clarity and clinical value.
自从贝塞斯达命名系统成功地使巴氏涂片结果标准化以来，在非妇科细胞病理学领域采用类似贝塞斯达的标准化分类格式的兴趣与日俱增。标准化分类报告相对于描述性报告可能具有若干优势，包括加强细胞病理学家与临床医生之间的沟通以及机构间的信息交流、为治疗规划提供更好的指导，以及便于进行用于研究目的或质量控制研究的统计分析。另一方面，描述性报告作为细胞病理学家之间的沟通工具可能更有效，在诊断困难和模棱两可的病例中可能更好地表达观察者的不确定性，并且可能更有助于细胞病理学家的培训和继续教育。未来关于细胞病理学中不同报告系统优缺点的研究可能会对这些问题提供进一步的见解。需要确定最具问题的领域并决定最佳解决方案。尽管关于细胞病理学中最佳报告格式的争论仍在继续，但就高质量细胞学报告（无论是描述性还是标准化的）在诊断准确性、清晰度和临床价值方面的必要性已达成普遍共识。
