Kahraman, S. 212 Kamei, T. 24 Kanayama, S. 133 Karger, T. IV Karlikaya, G. 212 Karša, M. 222 Kavanagh, J.J. 35 Kawaguchi, R. 133 Kaya, M. 217 Kikuchi, A. 73, 116 Kim, D.Y. 62 Kim, H.S. 62 Kim, J.C. 62 Kim, J.W. 41 Kim, S.K. 41 Kim, S.W. 123 Kim, Y.-H. 62 Kitanaka, T. 133 Kliucinskas, M. 32 Kobayashi, H. 133 Kollender, Y. 89 Kostirova, M. 47 Kozuma, S. 116 Kriplani, A. 84 Ku, J.H. 62, 123 Kulaš, T. 222 Kumbak, B. 212

Diagnostic CytopathologyVolume 36, Issue 2 p. 113-114 Images in Cytology Gestational choriocarcinoma: Morphological features in a liquid-based endometrial cytological sample Francesca Garbini M.D., Corresponding Author Francesca Garbini M.D. [email protected] Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalyDepartment of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Viale G.B. Morgagni, 85, Florence 50134, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAnna Maria Buccoliero M.D., Anna Maria Buccoliero M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorFrancesca Castiglione M.D., Francesca Castiglione M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorChiara Francesca Gheri M.D., Chiara Francesca Gheri M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorDaniela Moncini M.D., Daniela Moncini M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorDuccio Rossi Degl'Innocenti B.Sc., Duccio Rossi Degl'Innocenti B.Sc. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAlfredo Barbetti B.Sc., Alfredo Barbetti B.Sc. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAlessandro Villanucci M.D., Alessandro Villanucci M.D. Department of Gynecology, Perinatology, and Human Reproduction, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorGian Luigi Taddei M.D., Gian Luigi Taddei M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this author Francesca Garbini M.D., Corresponding Author Francesca Garbini M.D. [email protected] Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalyDepartment of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Viale G.B. Morgagni, 85, Florence 50134, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAnna Maria Buccoliero M.D., Anna Maria Buccoliero M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorFrancesca Castiglione M.D., Francesca Castiglione M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorChiara Francesca Gheri M.D., Chiara Francesca Gheri M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorDaniela Moncini M.D., Daniela Moncini M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorDuccio Rossi Degl'Innocenti B.Sc., Duccio Rossi Degl'Innocenti B.Sc. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAlfredo Barbetti B.Sc., Alfredo Barbetti B.Sc. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAlessandro Villanucci M.D., Alessandro Villanucci M.D. Department of Gynecology, Perinatology, and Human Reproduction, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorGian Luigi Taddei M.D., Gian Luigi Taddei M.D. Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, ItalySearch for more papers by this author First published: 07 January 2008 https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.20720Citations: 1AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. References 1 Muggia FM,Eifel PJ,Burke TW. Gestational trophoblastic diseases. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997. 1427 p. 2 Fox H,Buckley CH. The female genital tract and ovaries. New York: Oxford University Press; 1992. 1565 p. 3 Tavassoli A,Peter Devilee. Tumours of the breast and female genital organs. WHO: World Health Organization classification of tumors. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2003. 186 p. Citing Literature Volume36, Issue2February 2008Pages 113-114 ReferencesRelatedInformation

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of liquid-based cytology for endometrial surveillance in patients receiving tamoxifen. Methods: One hundred and sixty-eight women scheduled for hysteroscopy were enrolled in the study. The women sequentially underwent hysteroscopy, endometrial cytology and biopsy. Results: Endometrial biopsy only was inadequate in 112 (67%) patients, both endometrial biopsy and cytology were inadequate in 19 (11%) patients, endometrial cytology only was inadequate in 4 (2%) patients, and both endometrial biopsy and cytology were adequate in 33 (20%) patients. Overall, endometrial biopsy was inadequate in 131 (78%) patients and endometrial cytology in 23 (14%) patients. Endometrial cytology provided sufficient material for diagnosis more often than endometrial biopsy (p < 0.05). In the series of 33 patients (20%) in whom both endometrial cytology and biopsy were adequate, there was a 100% correlation between the endometrial cytology and biopsy results. Conclusions: For the first time, this study shows the diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based endometrial cytology in the follow-up of women receiving tamoxifen. It could be applied solely or in conjunction with ultrasonography.

Liquid‐based cytology represents an opportunity to re‐evaluate endometrial cytology. We evaluated the accuracy of liquid‐based endometrial cytology as compared to biopsy in 670 women scheduled for histeroscopy because of thickened endometrium (>4 mm), as evaluated by transvaginal sonography. Endometrial biopsy detected pathology in 41 (6%) of cases (21 of which were adenocarcinomas). Cytologic study found pathology in 62 (9%) cases (19 of which were adenocarcinomas). Two hundred ninety‐one biopsies (43%) and 28 (4%) cytologies were inadequate. The sensitivity and the specificity were estimated, respectively, at 95% and 98%; the positive and negative predictive values were estimated, respectively, at 83% and 99%. Cytology provided sufficient material more often than biopsy (P < 0.01). We consider endometrial cytology an efficacious diagnostic opportunity. It could be usefully applied in association with transvaginal sonography. The combination of these procedures might reduce more invasive and expensive diagnostic procedures. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2007;35:398–402. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.