CONTEXT: The surgical pathology report (SPR) is an essential part of patient care because it documents the pathologic findings in tissues removed from patients for diagnostic or therapeutic reasons. Despite the importance of the SPR, exhaustive guidelines outlining the various elements of the SPR have not, to our knowledge, been published. OBJECTIVES: To outline recommendations delineating the required, preferred, and optional elements that should be included in the SPR. These guidelines, if implemented, will bring uniformity to the reporting of surgical pathology specimens. DATA SOURCES: The Surgical Pathology Resource Committee of the College of American Pathologists compiled and prioritized the elements that have been included in various institutional SPRs. Additional data sources include the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program checklists and the recommendations of the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Each element was assigned a priority of required, preferred, or optional. These priorities were discussed and consensus was reached. This report does not address issues of formatting or style substantively. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations afford a framework for the creation of an SPR containing all of the components that are required or optimal for patient care.
CONTEXT: The surgical pathology report (SPR) is an essential part of patient care because it documents the pathologic findings in tissues removed from patients for diagnostic or therapeutic reasons. Despite the importance of the SPR, exhaustive guidelines outlining the various elements of the SPR have not, to our knowledge, been published. OBJECTIVES: To outline recommendations delineating the required, preferred, and optional elements that should be included in the SPR. These guidelines, if implemented, will bring uniformity to the reporting of surgical pathology specimens. DATA SOURCES: The Surgical Pathology Resource Committee of the College of American Pathologists compiled and prioritized the elements that have been included in various institutional SPRs. Additional data sources include the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program checklists and the recommendations of the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Each element was assigned a priority of required, preferred, or optional. These priorities were discussed and consensus was reached. This report does not address issues of formatting or style substantively. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations afford a framework for the creation of an SPR containing all of the components that are required or optimal for patient care.
Authors: Angela N Bartley; Mary Kay Washington; Christina B Ventura; Nofisat Ismaila; Carol Colasacco; Al B Benson; Alfredo Carrato; Margaret L Gulley; Dhanpat Jain; Sanjay Kakar; Helen J Mackay; Catherine Streutker; Laura Tang; Megan Troxell; Jaffer A Ajani Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2016-11-14 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Hannah Eyre; Alec B Chapman; Kelly S Peterson; Jianlin Shi; Patrick R Alba; Makoto M Jones; Tamára L Box; Scott L DuVall; Olga V Patterson Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2022-02-21
Authors: Christel Daniel; François Macary; Marcial García Rojo; Jacques Klossa; Arvydas Laurinavičius; Bruce A Beckwith; Vincenzo Della Mea Journal: Diagn Pathol Date: 2011-03-30 Impact factor: 2.644