Anomalías epiteliales glandulares y la importancia de los diagnósticos diferenciales. Estudio de caso

Glandular epithelial abnormalities and their importance in differential diagnoses: A case study

La presencia de anomalías epiteliales glandulares en los extendidos de citología cérvicouterina tanto convencional como en medio líquido, con frecuencia causan dificultad en la interpretación morfológica, por estar asociadas con diferentes procesos benignos o malignos de la mucosa que recubre el canal endocervical. A propósito de un caso con atipia celular endocervical sugestiva de neoplasia, se analizan las características morfológicas y la complementación con procedimientos especiales para establecer el diagnóstico preciso.

1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013.

2. Muñoz N, Hernandez-Suarez G, Méndez F, Molano M, Posso H, Moreno V, et al. Persistence of HPV infection and risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in a cohort of Colombian women. Br J Cancer. 2009;100:1184–90. Publicación electrónica 17 Mar 2009.

3. Coste J, Cochand-Priollet B, de Cremoux P, Le Galès C, Cartier I, Molinié V, et al. Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening. BMJ. 2003;326:733.

4. Kim HS, Underwood D. Adenocarcinomas in the cervicovaginal Papanicolaou smear: analysis of a 12-year experience. Diagn Cytopathol. 1991;7:119–24.

5. Johnson JE, Rahemtulla A. Endocervical glandular neoplasia and its mimics in ThinPrep Pap tests A descriptive study. Acta Cytol. 1999;43:369–75.

6. Bansal B, Gupta P, Gupta N, Rajwanshi A, Suri V. Detecting uterine glandular lesions: Role of cervical cytology. Cytojournal. 2016;13:3. Publicación electrónica 22 Feb 2016.

7. Wood MD, Horst JA, Bibbo M. Weeding atypical glandular cell look-alikes from the true atypical lesions in liquid-based Pap test: a review. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:12–7.

8. Simsir A, Hwang S, Cangiarella J, Elgert P, Levine P, Sheffield MV, et al. Glandular cell atypia on Papanicolaou smears: interobserver variability in the diagnosis and prediction of cell of origin. Cancer. 2003;99:323–30.

9. Zhao C, Austin RM, Pan J, Barr N, Martin SE, Raza A, et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells in conventional pap smears in a large, high-risk U S. west coast minority population. Acta Cytol. 2009;53:153–9.

10. Birdsong GG, Davis DD. Calidad de la muestra. En: Solomon D, Nayar R, editores. El Sistema Bethesda para informar la citología cervical Definiciones, criterios y notas aclaratorias. 3. a ed. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Journal; 2017. p. 1–27.

11. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810–9.

12. Burja IT, Thompson SK, Sawyer WL, Shurbaji MS. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance on cervical smears A study with cytohistologic correlation. Acta Cytol. 1999;43:351–6.

13. Kim SS, Suh DS, Kim KH, Yoon MS, Choi KU. Clinicopathological significance of atypical glandular cells on Pap smear. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2013;56:76–83. Publicación electrónica 12 Mar 2013.

14. Sharpless KE, Schnatz PF, Mandavilli S, Greene JF, Sorosky JI. Lack of adherence to practice guidelines for women with atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:501–6.

15. Duarte Torres RMCRS. Citipatología endocervical. En: Alonso de Ruiz P, Lazcano Ponce EC, Hernández Avila M, editores. Cáncer cervicouterino: diagnóstico, prevención y control. 2. a ed. México: Medica Panamerica; 2005. p. 91–103.

16. Wilbur DC, Chhieng DC, Guidos B, Mody DR. Anomalías epiteliales glandulares. En: Gg B, Davis DD, editores. El Sistema Bethesda para informar la citología cervical. Definiciones, criterios y notas aclaratorias. 3. a ed. Argentina: Ediciones Jourrnal; 2017. p. 181–225.

17. DiTomasso JP, Ramzy I, Mody DR. Glandular lesions of the cervix Validity of cytologic criteria used to differentiate reactive changes, glandular intraepithelial lesions and adenocarcinoma. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:1127–35.

18. Ghorab Z, Mahmood S, Schinella R. Endocervical reactive atypia: a histologic-cytologic study. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;22:342–6.

19. Wilbur DC. The cytology of the endocervix, endometrium, and upper female genital tract. En: Bonfiglio TA, Erozan YS, editores. Gynecologic cytopathology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997. p. 107–44.

20. Sharpless KE, O’Sullivan DM, Schnatz PF. The utility of human papillomavirus testing in the management of atypical glandular cells on cytology. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2009;13: 72–8.

21. Raab SS. Can glandular lesions be diagnosed in pap smear cytology? Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23:127–33.

22. Schnatz PF, Guile M, O’Sullivan DM, Sorosky JI. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:701–8.

23. Chhieng DC, Elgert PA, Cangiarella JF, Cohen JM. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance A follow-up study from an academic medical center. Acta Cytol. 2000;44:557–66.

24. Ronnett BM, Manos MM, Ransley JE, Fetterman BJ, Kinney WK, Hurley LB, et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS): cytopathologic features, histopathologic results, and human papillomavirus DNA detection. Hum Pathol. 1999;30:816–25.

25. Levine L, Lucci JA, Dinh TV. Atypical glandular cells: new Bethesda Terminology and Management Guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2003;58:399–406.

26. Wang J, Andrae B, Sundström K, Ström P, Ploner A, Elfström KM, et al. Risk of invasive cervical cancer after atypical glandular cells in cervical screening: nationwide cohort study. BMJ. 2016:352: i276. Publicación electrónica 11 Feb 2016.

27. Schnatz PF, Pattison K, Mandavilli S, Fiel-Gan M, Elsaccar OA, O’Sullivan DM, et al. Atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology and breast disease: what is the association? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2011;15:189–94.

28. Zhao C, Florea A, Onisko A, Austin RM. Histologic follow-up results in 662 patients with Pap test findings of atypical glandular cells: results from a large academic womens hospital laboratory employing sensitive screening methods. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:383–9. Publicación electrónica 7 Jun 2009.

29. Bulk S, Berkhof J, Bulkmans NW, Zielinski GD, Rozendaal L, van Kemenade FJ, et al. Preferential risk of HPV16 for squamous cell carcinoma and of HPV18 for adenocarcinoma of the cervix compared to women with normal cytology in The Netherlands. Br J Cancer. 2006;94:171–5.

30. Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. Guía de práctica clínica (GPC) para la detección y manejo de lesiones precancerosas de cuello uterino. Colombia: Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social; 2014. p. 30.

31. Diaz-Montes TP, Farinola MA, Zahurak ML, Bristow RE, Rosenthal DL. Clinical utility of atypical glandular cells (AGC) classification: cytohistologic comparison and relationship to HPV results. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;104:366–71. Publicación electrónica 16 Oct 2006.

32. Stoler MH, Raad SS, Wilbur DC. Pruebas complementarias. En: Nayar R, Wilbur DC, editores. El Sistema Bethesda para informar la citología cervical Definiciones, criterios y notas aclaratorias. Argentina: Ediciones Journal; 2017. p. 169–275.

33. Wentzensen N, Schiffman M, Chelmow D, Darragh T, Waxman AG. Evaluación del riesgo para la toma de decisions diagnostic-terapéuticas. En: Nayar R, Wilbur DC, editores. El Sistema Bethesda para informar la citología cervical. Argentina: Ediciones Journal; 2017. p. 287–95.