BACKGROUND: The accuracy of histological assessment of frozen section (FS) of the pancreatic resection margin (PRM) at pancreatico-duodenectomy can be improved by concurrent FS examination of a sample of the suspected pancreatic lesion. METHODS: A prospective trial was conducted using archived material. FS of all the PRM and suspected pancreatic lesion of 12 patients randomly selected from a historical group who underwent pancreatico-duodenectomy for suspected malignancy were examined by five histopathologists. They were asked to examine the PRM alone and alongside the suspected lesion. The diagnosis of the PRM was 'benign', 'malignant' or 'defer to paraffin section'. All the histopathologists were blinded to the paraffin section diagnosis. RESULTS: The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity and the incidence of deferring to paraffin section. In this respect examination of the PRM alone had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 87.5%. Concurrent FS examination of PRM with the pancreatic lesion increased the sensitivity to 90% and the specificity to 92.5%. The incidence of deferring to paraffin section was reduced from 17 to 7% (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This policy is recommended because it improves the diagnostic accuracy of FS evaluation of the PRM resulting in a reduction of residual pancreatic cancer at the pancreatic transection line.
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of histological assessment of frozen section (FS) of the pancreatic resection margin (PRM) at pancreatico-duodenectomy can be improved by concurrent FS examination of a sample of the suspected pancreatic lesion. METHODS: A prospective trial was conducted using archived material. FS of all the PRM and suspected pancreatic lesion of 12 patients randomly selected from a historical group who underwent pancreatico-duodenectomy for suspected malignancy were examined by five histopathologists. They were asked to examine the PRM alone and alongside the suspected lesion. The diagnosis of the PRM was 'benign', 'malignant' or 'defer to paraffin section'. All the histopathologists were blinded to the paraffin section diagnosis. RESULTS: The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity and the incidence of deferring to paraffin section. In this respect examination of the PRM alone had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 87.5%. Concurrent FS examination of PRM with the pancreatic lesion increased the sensitivity to 90% and the specificity to 92.5%. The incidence of deferring to paraffin section was reduced from 17 to 7% (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This policy is recommended because it improves the diagnostic accuracy of FS evaluation of the PRM resulting in a reduction of residual pancreatic cancer at the pancreatic transection line.
Authors: Livia S Eberlin; Robert J Tibshirani; Jialing Zhang; Teri A Longacre; Gerald J Berry; David B Bingham; Jeffrey A Norton; Richard N Zare; George A Poultsides Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Livia S Eberlin; Katherine Margulis; Ivette Planell-Mendez; Richard N Zare; Robert Tibshirani; Teri A Longacre; Moe Jalali; Jeffrey A Norton; George A Poultsides Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 11.069