Standardizing Cytological Reporting: The WHO Reporting System of Lymph Node Cytology and its Impact on Clinical Practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21276/apalm.3645Keywords:
lymphadenopathy, FNAC, reactive lymphadenitis, metastatic squamous cell carcinoma, Risk of MalignancyAbstract
Background: Lymphadenopathy commonly results from benign conditions such as reactive hyperplasia or lymphadenitis. Fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is widely used for initial evaluation due to its speed, affordability, and diagnostic utility. To improve consistency, the World Health Organization (WHO) and International Academy of Cytology developed a standardized reporting system for lymph node cytology. In this study, we aim to classify the findings of lymph node cytopathology as per the WHO system and assess the Risk of Malignancy through histopathological correlation.
Methods: A retrospective study of 240 cases was conducted at SMCH over one year (July 2023-July 2024). Cases with available histopathology or follow-up data were included. ROM was calculated by correlating cytological diagnoses with final outcomes.
Results: Cervical lymphadenopathy was most frequent (82%), with a slight male predominance. Benign lesions comprised 71.25% of cases, mostly reactive lymphadenitis (76%). Malignant cases (17.91%) were predominantly metastatic squamous cell carcinoma (77%). ROM was highest in the suspicious and malignant categories (100%) and lowest in the benign group (2.34%).
Conclusion: The WHO Reporting System for Lymph node Cytopathology provided a clear, reproducible framework that improved diagnostic accuracy in our study. High Risk of Malignancy in atypical, suspicious, and malignant categories aligns with previous research, confirming the system's reliability. Low Risk in benign and inadequate categories emphasizes cautious interpretation and follow-up. This standardized approach enhances communication between cytopathologists and clinicians, improving patient management.
References
1. Bazemore AW, Smucker DR. Lymphadenopathy and malignancy. Am Fam Physician. 2002;66(11):2103-10.
2. Habermann TM, Steensma DP. Lymphadenopathy. Mayo Clin Proc. 2000 75(7):723-32.
3. van den Bruel A, Aertgeerts B, Bruyninckx R, Aerts M, Buntinx F. Signs and symptoms for diagnosis of serious infections in children: a prospective study in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2007;57(540):538-43.
4. Mohseni S. Shojaiefard A, Khorgami Z, Alinejad S, Ghorbani A, Ghafouri A. Peripheral lymphadenopathy: approach and diagnostic tools. Iran J Med Sci. 2014;39(2 Suppl):158-70.
5. Ferrer R. Lymphadenopathy: differential diagnosis and evaluation. Am Fam Physician. 1998;58(6):1313-20.
6. Kelly CS, Kelly RE. Lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatr Clin North Am. 1998;45(4):875-88.
7. Orell SR, Sterrett GF, Whitaker D. Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2012.
8. Haque MA, Talukder SI, Khan RA. FNAC in the diagnosis of lymphadenopathy: A study of 256 cases. J Bangladesh Coll Phys Surg. 2008:26(2):66-9.
9. Bangerter M. Brudler O. Heinrich B. Fine needle aspiration cytology of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease: A cytomorphologic study with application of the Kiel classification. Acta Cytol. 1997;41(2):487-94.
10. WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. The WHO System for Reporting Lymph Node Cytopathology. Lyon (France): International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2022. (WHO Classification of Tumours series, 5th ed.; vol. 15).
11. Rossi ED, Fadda G, Mulè A, Zatelli MC, Palombini L. WHO System for Reporting Lymph Node Cytopathology: proposed guidelines and application. Acta Cytol. 2022;66(4):275-283.
12. Ferrer R. Lymphadenopathy: differential diagnosis and evaluation. Am Fam Physician. 1998;58(6):1313-1320.
13. Reddy MP, et al. Fine needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of lymphadenopathy. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 1996;39(4):347-354.
14. Haque MA, et al. FNAC in the diagnosis of lymphadenopathy: A comparative study with histopathology. Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull. 2010;36(1):1-5.
15. Nanda A, et al. Evaluation of cytological classification systems for lymphadenopathy: comparative assessment. Acta Cytol. 2020:64(3):259-266.
16. Sharma P, et al. Pattern of metastatic tumors in lymph nodes. J Cytol. 2011;28(4):153-156.
17. Caputo A, Zocchi B, Donfrancesco C, et al. Application of the WHO Reporting System for Lymph Node Cytopathology: a multi-institutional experience. Cytopathology. 2021;32(6):703-710.
18. Gupta N. Nijhawan R, Srinivasan R, et al. Risk of malignancy in different diagnostic categories of lymph node fine needle aspiration cytology using the WHO system: A study of 6983 cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 2021;49(6):944-951.
19. Vigliar E, Petrillo M, Tambaro FP, et al. Diagnostic categories and risk of malignancy in lymph node cytopathology: a review of 300 cases applying the WHO reporting system. Acta Cytol. 2021;65(4):315-321.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Sabeha Tasneem, Sushmita Kairi, Momota Naiding
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).
