Literature DB >> 15646532

Is routine pathologic evaluation of hemorrhoidectomy specimens necessary?

Nicolas Lemarchand1, Florence Tanne, Manuel Aubert, Paul Benfredj, Jean Denis, Noëlle Dubois-Arnous, Katia Fellous, Roland Ganansia, Agnès Senejoux, Denis Soudan, Thierry Puy-Montbrun.   

Abstract

AIM: To confirm that systematic histological study of hemorrhoidectomy specimens is useless, as is proposed by the French Society of Coloproctology (Société Nationale Française de Colo-Proctologie) under the sponsorship of the French National Health Accreditation and Evaluation Agency (Agence Nationale d'Accréditation et d'Evaluation en Santé).
METHODS: Retrospective histological analysis of hemorrhoidectomy specimens obtained in a coloproctology unit between January 1, 1985 and December 31, 2001.
RESULTS: We found 56 histological abnormalities (0.69%) among 8153 hemorrhoidectomy specimens considered normal at gross examination, with three cases of intraepithelial neoplasia of the anal canal (0.04%) and four cases of severe dysplasia (0.05%). Specimens associated with anal fissure (N = 906) or suppuration (N = 610) did not display more histological lesions. For all patients, the initial surgical resection prevented recurrence.
CONCLUSION: Routine pathological evaluation of hemorrhoidectomy specimens is not useful and is expensive. All operating procedures in proctology should reflect this attitude. It is nevertheless advisable to select for gross and microscopic evaluation any suspicious areas noticed at the preoperative examination or during the procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15646532     DOI: 10.1016/s0399-8320(04)95044-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin Biol        ISSN: 0399-8320


  7 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

3.  Anal metastasis from rectal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Takeshi Nishikawa; Soichiro Ishihara; Tetsuo Ushiku; Keisuke Hata; Kazuhito Sasaki; Koji Murono; Koji Yasuda; Kensuke Otani; Toshiaki Tanaka; Tomomichi Kiyomatsu; Kazushige Kawai; Hiroaki Nozawa; Toshiaki Watanabe
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-10-01

Review 4.  Anal cancer: are we making progress?

Authors:  Ajay Aggarwal; Simon Duke; Rob Glynne-Jones
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.075

5.  Routine histopathologic examination of two common surgical specimens-appendix and gallbladder: is it a waste of expertise and hospital resources?

Authors:  Sushma N Ramraje; Veena I Pawar
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 0.656

6.  Routine pathology examination in the era of value-based healthcare: the case of haemorrhoids specimens.

Authors:  Pietro Mascagni; Chiara Eberspacher; Federica Saraceno; Emanuele Felli; Pierpaolo Sileri; Lisa Fralleone; Fabio Magliocca; Domenico Mascagni
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2020-01-06

Review 7.  Background and Current Treatment of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anus.

Authors:  Rob Glynne-Jones; Waqar Saleem; Mark Harrison; Suzy Mawdsley; Marcia Hall
Journal:  Oncol Ther       Date:  2016-08-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.