ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: During the past decade, the theory that high-grade extrauterine pelvic tumors originate from the fallopian tube has been strongly suggested. Our study aims to illuminate the possible role of tubal cytology as an accessory identification tool for gynecologic extrauterine malignancies, allowing in the long term the implementation of population-level cytologic tube evaluation during all benign gynecologic surgeries that do not result in salpingectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We ex vivo collect salpingeal epithelial cells from the fibria directly from fresh fallopian tube specimens from women undergoing salpingectomy for any indication. The cytomorphologic characteristics of the salpingeal cells are subsequently evaluated and categorized into malignant and non-malignant. Finally, the ipsilateral adnexa are examined with the SEE-FIM (Sectioning and Extensively Examining the FIMbriated End) protocol and the pathology reports are corelated with the cytologic findings. Our research protocol is ongoing and is designed to include a total of 300 patients in order to confirm the sensitivity and specificity of salpingeal cytology as a method in the early diagnosis of extrauterine gynecologic malignancies. RESULTS: So far, we have obtained 343 salpingeal brushings from a total of 214 patients. The sensitivity of cytology regarding distinguishing malignant from non-malignant tumors is 69.64% (95% CI: 55.90%-81.22%), and its specificity 75.96% (95% CI: 70.59%-80.79%). Cytology's positive predictive value (PPV) is 16.33% (95% CI: 12.57%-20.67%), while the negative predictive value (NPP) reached 92.77% (95% CI: 89.56%-95.04%). In general, the diagnostic accuracy of the cytologic evaluation reaches 74.93% (95% CI: 66.99%-79.43%). CONCLUSIONS: Salpingeal cytomorphologic evaluation appears to be a promising method for early detection of adnexal cancer.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to analyze the published evidence for the use of fallopian tube brush cytology for the early detection of extrauterine serous gynecological cancer. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature and, additionally, cross-checked on the bibliographies of selected articles. The inclusion criteria involved studies assessing the utility of fallopian tube brush cytology and its applications in the diagnosis, screening, or follow-up of extrauterine serous gynecological cancer. RESULTS: The search strategy resulted in 21 abstracts or full-text articles, 5 of which met the inclusion criteria. The year of publication ranged from 2016 to 2022, and a total of 193 fallopian tube samples were investigated. Cytobrush, Tubebrush©, and Cytuity™ were used to obtain salpingeal samples for liquid-based cytology evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that, at present, there is a lack of satisfying evidence-based data in the literature which would support the implementation of fallopian tube brush cytology as an adjunctive tool for early detection of extrauterine serous gynecological cancer. Thus, we believe that there is need for well-designed clinical studies to assess the effectiveness and diagnostic accuracy of the method as well as to validate the cytological criteria for the diagnosis and prediction of gynecological malignancies.
