O Biedrzycki1, M Varma, D M Berney. 1. Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, St Bartholomews Hospital, West Smithfield, London, EC1 7BE, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the variation in the processing of prostatic needle cores in the UK and to compare the results with suggested guidelines. METHODS: A standard questionnaire was sent to 210 pathology departments enquiring about current practices. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty replies were received, which showed considerable variation in current methods. The number of cores received for each case ranged from three to 21, with the number of cores processed for each cassette varying from one to 10. Sixty per cent of centres used no special embedding techniques, and the number of sections cut for each case varied from two to 128, with a median of 12 sections for each case. Forty two per cent of laboratories did not take spare slides for immunochemistry. CONCLUSIONS: There is great variation in the processing of prostatic cores in the UK. In particular, some laboratories process a large number of cores in each cassette and do not use special embedding techniques. At present there are no established guidelines for the processing of these specimens. Enhanced techniques may well increase the sensitivity of the test but would increase the workload and costs to the pathology department. In view of the increasing workload from these specimens, a consensus for their optimum processing is required.
AIMS: To determine the variation in the processing of prostatic needle cores in the UK and to compare the results with suggested guidelines. METHODS: A standard questionnaire was sent to 210 pathology departments enquiring about current practices. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty replies were received, which showed considerable variation in current methods. The number of cores received for each case ranged from three to 21, with the number of cores processed for each cassette varying from one to 10. Sixty per cent of centres used no special embedding techniques, and the number of sections cut for each case varied from two to 128, with a median of 12 sections for each case. Forty two per cent of laboratories did not take spare slides for immunochemistry. CONCLUSIONS: There is great variation in the processing of prostatic cores in the UK. In particular, some laboratories process a large number of cores in each cassette and do not use special embedding techniques. At present there are no established guidelines for the processing of these specimens. Enhanced techniques may well increase the sensitivity of the test but would increase the workload and costs to the pathology department. In view of the increasing workload from these specimens, a consensus for their optimum processing is required.