What is the Milan grading system in cytology for salivary gland lesions?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: January 15, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology

The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) is a standardized, evidence-based risk stratification system that categorizes salivary gland fine-needle aspiration specimens into six diagnostic categories, each with defined risk of malignancy (ROM) to guide clinical management. 1

Six Diagnostic Categories

The MSRSGC consists of the following hierarchical categories with progressively increasing malignancy risk 1:

1. Non-Diagnostic (ND)

  • ROM: 0-15% across multiple validation studies 2, 3, 4
  • Includes inadequate cellularity, poor preservation, or obscuring blood 2
  • Management: Repeat FNA is recommended 2

2. Non-Neoplastic (NN)

  • ROM: 0-14.28% 3, 5
  • Includes inflammatory conditions, cysts, and normal salivary gland tissue 2
  • Management: Clinical follow-up without surgery in most cases 2

3. Atypia of Undetermined Significance (AUS)

  • ROM: 33.33-75% 3, 5
  • Reserved for cases with cytologic atypia that cannot be definitively classified 2
  • This category shows the widest variation in ROM across studies, reflecting diagnostic uncertainty 3, 5
  • Management: Repeat FNA or surgical excision depending on clinical context 2

4. Benign Neoplasm (BN)

  • ROM: 2.2-9.5% 3, 4
  • Includes pleomorphic adenoma, Warthin tumor, and other benign salivary gland tumors 2
  • Pleomorphic adenoma is the most common diagnosis in this category 5
  • Management: Conservative surgical excision 2

5. Salivary Gland Neoplasm of Uncertain Malignant Potential (SUMP)

  • ROM: 13.3-66.66% 4, 5
  • Used for neoplasms where cytomorphology cannot reliably distinguish benign from low-grade malignancy 1
  • Shows significant ROM variability, reflecting the inherent diagnostic challenge 4, 5
  • Management: Surgical excision with intraoperative consultation 2

6. Suspicious for Malignancy (SM)

  • ROM: 50-100% 3, 4
  • Features suggestive but not diagnostic of malignancy 2
  • Management: Surgical excision with consideration for more extensive resection 2

7. Malignant (M)

  • ROM: 80-100% 3, 6, 5
  • Definitive cytologic features of malignancy 2
  • The malignant category is subdivided into low-grade and high-grade tumors 1
  • Management: Radical surgery with or without adjuvant therapy based on grade and stage 2

Clinical Performance Characteristics

The Milan System demonstrates excellent diagnostic accuracy when validated against histopathology 6:

  • Sensitivity: 75-94.20% for detecting malignancy 4, 6
  • Specificity: 94.6-98.4% for excluding malignancy 3, 4
  • Positive Predictive Value: 82.4-98.48% 3, 6
  • Negative Predictive Value: 85.71-98.2% 3, 6
  • Overall diagnostic accuracy: 87.50-94.4% 3, 5

Integration with Clinical Guidelines

Pathologists should report risk of malignancy using the Milan System as the standardized risk stratification scheme for salivary gland cytopathology. 7 This recommendation is supported by ASCO guidelines that emphasize standardized reporting to guide surgical decision-making 1.

Key Clinical Applications

The Milan System enables risk-based treatment selection: 2

  • Categories I-II (ND, NN): Follow-up without surgery
  • Category III (AUS): Repeat FNA or selective surgery
  • Category IV (BN): Conservative surgical excision
  • Categories V-VII (SUMP, SM, M): Surgical excision with extent determined by malignancy risk

Surgeons may request intraoperative pathologic examination for SUMP and SM categories to guide the extent of resection, but major decisions such as facial nerve sacrifice should not be based on indeterminate diagnoses alone. 1

Important Caveats

False-negative rates can reach 20% even with the Milan System, necessitating correlation with clinical findings and imaging 1. The AUS and SUMP categories show the widest ROM variability across studies (33-75% and 13-67% respectively), reflecting inherent diagnostic challenges in these borderline lesions 3, 5.

Core needle biopsy may be necessary for deep minor salivary glands where FNA access is limited, as the Milan System was primarily validated for major salivary gland lesions 7.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.