Literature DB >> 24891777

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

Sushma N Ramraje1, Veena I Pawar2.   

Abstract

This study was undertaken to assess whether a routine histopathologic examination of two common surgical specimens (appendix and gallbladder) is needed and whether routine histopathologic examination has an impact on further management of patients. Histopathology reports of patients who had undergone appendicectomy and cholecystectomy, between 2006 and 2010, were analyzed retrospectively in the department of pathology of a tertiary care hospital. The case notes were retrieved in all cases of malignancies. Patients having a clinical diagnosis or suspicion of malignancy were excluded. The incidence and impact of unexpected pathologic diagnosis on postoperative management were noted. The study period included a total of 1,123 and 711 appendicectomy and cholecystectomy specimens, respectively. Fifteen (1.336 %) cases of appendicectomy specimens revealed incidental unexpected pathological diagnoses, which included tubercular appendicitis (n = 2), parasite (n = 8), neuroma (n = 1), carcinoid (n = 2), pseudomyxoma (n = 1), and adenocarcinoma (n = 1). About 88 % of such unexpected appendiceal findings had an impact on postoperative treatment. Unexpected pathologic gallbladder findings were found in 12 (1.68 %) of 711 cholecystectomy specimens. In 6 (0.84 %) cases, gallbladder cancer (GBC) was detected. Additional further management was required in 50 % of patients with unexpected gallbladder findings. Twenty of the total 1,834 specimens (1.090 %) had an impact on patient management or outcome and were not suspected on macroscopic examination at the time of surgery. These would have been missed had the specimens not been examined microscopically. The intraoperative diagnosis of the surgeon is therefore sometimes doubtful in detecting abnormalities of the appendix and gallbladder. This study supports the sending of all appendicectomy and cholecystectomy specimens for routine histopathological examination. Appendix and gallbladder should undergo routine histopathological examination. This is important in patients with advanced age and gallstones. Also, it is of great value in identifying unsuspected conditions which require further postoperative management. Selectively sending specimens for histopathological examination can result in reduced workload on the histopathology department without compromising patient safety.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Appendicectomy; Cholecystectomy; Gallbladder cancer; Histopathology

Year:  2012        PMID: 24891777      PMCID: PMC4039683          DOI: 10.1007/s12262-012-0645-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Surg        ISSN: 0973-9793            Impact factor:   0.656


  18 in total

1.  Enhancing the pathologist's role at hospital tumor boards.

Authors:  Stephen L Strobel
Journal:  Ann Clin Lab Sci       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.256

Review 2.  Epidemiology and risk factors for gallstone disease: has the paradigm changed in the 21st century?

Authors:  Eldon A Shaffer
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2005-05

3.  Gallbladder cancer in a high risk area: morphological features and spread patterns.

Authors:  I Roa; J C Araya; M Villaseca; J Roa; X de Aretxabala; G Ibacache
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  1999 May-Jun

Review 4.  Epidemiology and molecular pathology of gallbladder cancer.

Authors:  E C Lazcano-Ponce; J F Miquel; N Muñoz; R Herrero; C Ferrecio; I I Wistuba; P Alonso de Ruiz; G Aristi Urista; F Nervi
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2001 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  [Natural history of cholelithiasis and incidence of cholecystectomy in an urban and a Mapuche rural area].

Authors:  Rosa María Pérez-Ayuso; Verónica Hernández; Berta González; Claudia Carvacho; Carlos Navarrete; Manuel Alvarez; Robinson González; Guillermo Marshall; Juan Francisco Miquel; Flavio Nervi
Journal:  Rev Med Chil       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 0.553

6.  Unsuspected gallbladder cancer diagnosed during or after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A-Hon Kwon; Atsushi Imamura; Hiroaki Kitade; Yasuo Kamiyama
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 3.454

7.  Is there any justification for the routine histological examination of straightforward cholecystectomy specimens?

Authors:  B Darmas; S Mahmud; A Abbas; A L Baker
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  [Gallbladder cancer in the IX Region of Chile. Impact of the anatomopathological study of 474 cases].

Authors:  I Roa; J C Araya; I Wistuba; M Villaseca; X de Aretxabala; L Burgos
Journal:  Rev Med Chil       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 0.553

9.  Epidemiology of gallbladder cancer and trends in cholecystectomy rates in Scotland, 1968-1998.

Authors:  R Wood; L A Fraser; D H Brewster; O J Garden
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 9.162

10.  The value of routine histopathological examination of appendicectomy specimens.

Authors:  Alun E Jones; Alexander W Phillips; John R Jarvis; Kevin Sargen
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2007-08-10       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  8 in total

1.  Routine versus selective histological examination after cholecystectomy to exclude incidental gallbladder carcinoma.

Authors:  C D Emmett; P Barrett; A D Gilliam; A I Mitchell
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 2.  Histological assessment of cholecystectomy specimens performed for symptomatic cholelithiasis: routine or selective?

Authors:  J A S B Jayasundara; W M M de Silva
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Incidental findings during routine pathological evaluation of gallbladder specimens: review of 1,747 elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases.

Authors:  F Basak; M Hasbahceci; T Canbak; A Sisik; A Acar; M Yucel; G Bas; O Alimoglu
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 1.891

4.  Should We Abandon Routine Microscopic Examination in Bariatric Sleeve Gastrectomy Specimens?

Authors:  Badr AbdullGaffar; Lakshmiah Raman; Ali Khamas; Faisal AlBadri
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.129

5.  Histopathological Changes in Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Specimens: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Value of Routine Histopathologic Examination.

Authors:  Tamer Safaan; Moataz Bashah; Walid El Ansari; Mohsen Karam
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  Incidental finding of lymphoma after septoplasty.

Authors:  Edward C Kuan; Bobby A Tajudeen; Sunita M Bhuta; Miguel Fernando Palma Diaz; Paul A Kedeshian; Jeffrey D Suh
Journal:  Allergy Rhinol (Providence)       Date:  2016-07-27

Review 7.  Safe, selective histopathological examination of gallbladder specimens: a systematic review.

Authors:  V P Bastiaenen; J E Tuijp; S van Dieren; M G Besselink; T M van Gulik; L Koens; P J Tanis; W A Bemelman
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Neuroma of the appendix, a rare cause of appendicitis and an important reason for close follow-up.

Authors:  Gabriel A Molina; Marco Alejandro Torres; Mauro Santiago Montenegro; Gery Daniel Sánchez; Alberto Carlos Arcia; Juan José Enríquez; Andres Vinicio Ayala; Monica Elizabeth Orejuela
Journal:  J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2020-03-02
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.