Comparison of cross-sectional radiological with fine needle aspiration biopsy and histopathological examination in differential diagnosis of parotid gland tumors
İlhan Ünlü1, Elif Nisa Ünlü2, Selim Ulucanlı1, Murat Oktay3, Ethem İlhan1, Ender Güçlü1, Gülin Gökçen Kesici4
1Düzce Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Anabilim Dalı
2Düzce Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Radyoloji Anabilim Dalı
3Düzce Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Patoloji Anabilim Dalı
4Ankara Meslek Hastalıkları Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Kliniği
Keywords: Computed tomography, fine needle aspiration biopsy, histopathological examination, magnetic resonance imaging, parotid tumors.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the role of cross-sectional radiological imaging in the differential diagnosis of parotid gland masses.
METHODS: Thirty-five patients (21 males, 14 females; mean age 50.0±11.5 years; range 20 to 70 years) who underwent operation in our clinic due to parotid gland mass between January 2010 and June 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients’ demographic data were evaluated. Cross-sectional radiological images (computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) were re-evaluated by an experienced radiologist. Cross-sectional radiological differential diagnoses were compared with fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and histopathological diagnosis.
RESULTS: Malignancy was detected in two patients (5.71%) in histopathological examination. Of these patients, we were able to demonstrate malignancy with FNAB and cross-sectional radiological imaging in only one patient (2.85%). Of the 20 patients whose cross-sectional radiological diagnosis was pleomorphic adenoma, diagnosis was confirmed with FNAB in 12 (60%), and histopathologically in 14 (70%) patients. Of the 12 patients whose cross-sectional radiological diagnosis was Warthin’s tumor, diagnosis was confirmed with FNAB in six (50%), and histopathologically in seven (58.3%) patients. Of the two patients diagnosed as lymphadenopathy according to cross-sectional radiological findings, diagnosis was supported by FNAB in one (50%), and histopathologically in the other patient. One patient who was diagnosed as mucoepidermoid carcinoma according to cross-sectional radiological findings was diagnosed as Warthin’s tumor with FNAB and histopathological examination.
CONCLUSION: Cross-sectional radiological imaging alone is not sufficient for the differential diagnosis of parotid gland tumors. More accurate results can be obtained when this method is used together with FNAB.