Literature DB >> 12691348

Routine pathological evaluation of tissue from inguinal hernias in children is unnecessary.

Grant G Miller1, Susan E McDonald, Kris Milbrandt, Rajni Chibbar.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Because unexpected disease is rare in a child's inguinal hernia sac we decided to investigate the cost of routine pathological evaluation of inguinal hernial sacs in children and the incidence of clinically significant pathological findings.
METHODS: We searched the health records at the University Hospital, Saskatoon, for patients under 20 years of age who had inguinal hernia repair between 1988 and 1997. For records noting pathology findings of duct-like structures, the operative reports and histology slides were reviewed. Specimens were immunostained for muscle-specific actin. The cost of pathological evaluation was estimated using a provincial physician-billing schedule.
RESULTS: During the study period, there were 488 inguinal hernia repairs in 371 patients under 20 years of age. Of these, 456 (93.4%) specimens were evaluated microscopically. There were 4 (0.88%) cases with unexpected findings diagnosed as epididymis at a cost of Can dollar 6988/case.
CONCLUSION: The routine histologic evaluation of inguinal hernia sacs in children is an unnecessary expense and should be reserved for select cases at the discretion of the surgeon.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12691348      PMCID: PMC3211686     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Surg        ISSN: 0008-428X            Impact factor:   2.089


  12 in total

1.  Bilateral exploration in inguinal hernia in juvenile patients. Review and appraisal.

Authors:  R S SPARKMAN
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1962-03       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 2.  A study of metastatic cancer found during inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  C P Nicholson; J H Donohue; G B Thompson; J E Lewis
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1992-06-15       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Alleged resection of the vas deferens: medicolegal implications.

Authors:  F Tolete-Velcek; E Leddomado; F Hansbrough; W L Thelmo
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 2.545

4.  Embryonal remnants in inguinal hernia sacs.

Authors:  E J Popek
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 3.466

5.  The pathological evaluation of the pediatric inguinal hernia sac.

Authors:  W J Wenner; M Gutenberg; T Crombleholme; C Flickinger; S P Bartlett
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 2.545

6.  Glandular inclusions in inguinal hernia sacs: a clinicopathological study of six cases.

Authors:  J J Gómez-Román; M Mayorga; C Mira; L Buelta; F Fernández; J F Val-Bernal
Journal:  Pediatr Pathol       Date:  1994 Nov-Dec

7.  Glandular inclusions in inguinal hernial sacs and spermatic cords. Müllerian-like remnants confused with functional reproductive structures.

Authors:  A N Walker; S E Mills
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 2.493

Review 8.  Extrarenal Wilms' tumor.

Authors:  E T Fernandes; M Kumar; E C Douglass; J Wilimas; D M Parham; B N Rao
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 2.545

9.  Prospective randomized controlled study of excision versus distal splitting of hernial sac and processus vaginalis in the repair of inguinal hernias and communicating hydroceles.

Authors:  D B Gahukamble; A S Khamage
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.545

10.  Is routine pathological evaluation of pediatric hernia sacs justified?

Authors:  D A Partrick; D D Bensard; F M Karrer; S Z Ruyle
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.545

View more
  5 in total

1.  A novel technique for vas deferens transection repairs.

Authors:  Ibrahim Onur Ozen; Baris Bagbanci; Arzu Demirtola; Ramazan Karabulut; Ozlem Ozen; Billur Demirogullari; Zafer Turkyilmaz; Kaan Sonmez; Abdullah Can Basaklar; Nuri Kale
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2006-08-11       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 2.  Does everything a surgeon takes out have to be seen by a pathologist? A review of the current pathology practice.

Authors:  Ivan Damjanov; Semir Vranic; Faruk Skenderi
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Should all excised surgical specimens be examined microscopically? A case report.

Authors:  Thomas M Raymond; Sam Ibrahim; Pradeep S Basnyat
Journal:  Cases J       Date:  2010-01-28

4.  Value of routine histopathologic examination of three common surgical specimens: appendix, gallbladder, and hemorrhoid.

Authors:  Varut Lohsiriwat; Akkarash Vongjirad; Darin Lohsiriwat
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Routine histopathologic examination of "benign" anal lesions: is it necessary?

Authors:  Xiaosheng He; Juanni Huang; Jinbin Yao; Zexian Chen; Lei Lian; Senmao Li; Santosh Rouniyar; Yufeng Chen; Xiaojian Wu; Ping Lan
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-01-22       Impact factor: 2.549

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.