Journals / Türk Patoloji Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 3

The Contribution of Additional Sampling in Cholecystectomy Materials: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Pages
188–194
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was also shown that the necessity of having standard criteria for macroscopic and microscopic examination plays an importantrole in making the correct diagnosis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Cholecystectomy materials are frequently encountered in routine practice.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of this study was to determine the true frequencyof gallbladder lesions, the diagnostic consistency, and standardization of reports after macroscopic sampling and microscopic evaluation basedon previously defined criteria.Material and Method: 14 institutions participated in the study within the Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Pathology Study Group.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was also shown that the necessity of having standard criteria for macroscopic and microscopic examination plays an importantrole in making the correct diagnosis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Cholecystectomy materials are frequently encountered in routine practice. The aim of this study was to determine the true frequencyof gallbladder lesions, the diagnostic consistency, and standardization of reports after macroscopic sampling and microscopic evaluation basedon previously defined criteria.Material and Method: 14 institutions participated in the study within the Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Pathology Study Group. Routinely examinedcholecystectomies within the last year were included in the study in these institutions. Additional sampling was performed according to theindications and criteria. The number of blocks and samples taken in the first macroscopic examination and the number of blocks and samplestaken in the additional sampling were determined and the rate of diagnostic contribution of the additional examination was determined.Results: A total of 5,244 cholecystectomy materials from 14 institutions were included in the study. Additional sampling was found to be necessaryin 576 cases (10.98%) from all institutions. In the first macroscopic sampling, the mean of the numbers of samples was approximately 4 and thenumber of blocks was 2. The mean of the numbers of additional samples and blocks was approximately 8 and 4, respectively. The diagnosis waschanged in 144 of the 576 new sampled cases while the remaining 432 stayed unaltered.Conclusion: In this study, it was observed that new sampling after the first microscopic examination of cholecystectomy materials contributed tothe diagnosis. It was also shown that the necessity of having standard criteria for macroscopic and microscopic examination plays an importantrole in making the correct diagnosis.

🔖

Cite This Article

SAKA, B., TURHAN, N., KESER, S. H., ÇELİK, S., SAĞOL, Ö., YILMAZ, B. Ö., EKİNCİ, Ö., TUNÇEL, D., ERHAN, S. Ş., ABDULLAZADE, S., AKARCA, F. G., ESENDAĞLI, G., ERDEN, E., SAVAŞ, B., MARKOÇ, F., GÜCİN, Z., GÜCİN, Z., ÖZER, H., SEVEN, İ. E. (2022). The Contribution of Additional Sampling in Cholecystectomy Materials: A Multicenter Prospective Study. Türk Patoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 3, 188–194. https://ajindex.com/articles/655202

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Royal College of Pathologists, Histopathology and cytopathology of limited or no clinical value, in Report of Working Group of the Royal College of Pathologists. 2nd ed. London, 2005
  2. Talreja V, Ali A, Khawaja R, Rani K, Samnani SS, Farid FN. Surgically resected gallbladder: Is histopathology needed for all? Surg Res Pract. 2016; 2016:9319147
  3. Sikora S, Singh R. Surgical strategies in patients with gallbladder cancer: Nihilism to optimism. J Surg Oncol. 2006; 93:670-81
  4. Argon A, Yağcı A, Taşlı F, Kebat T, Deniz S, Erkan N, Kitapçıoğlu G, Vardar E. A different perspective on macroscopic sampling of cholecystectomy specimens. Korean J Pathol. 2013;47:519-25
  5. Albores-Saavedra J, Henson DE, Klimstra DS. Tumors of the gallbladder, extrahepatic bile ducts, and ampulla of Vater. In: Atlas of tumor pathology. Third series, fascicle 27. Washington DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology; 2000
  6. Rosai J, Appendix E: Guidelines for handling of most common and important surgical specimens. In: Rosai and Ackerman’s Surgical Pathology, Vol:2, 10th ed. Missouri:Elsevier; 2011: 2601
  7. Allen DC, Cameron IA, Loughrey MB. Gallbladder. In: Histopathology Specimens. Clinical, pathological and laboratory aspects. Allen DC, Cameron IA, editors. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2013. 95
  8. Abraham S. Gallbladder and extrahepatic biliary system. In: Surgical pathology dissection. An Illustrated Guide. Westra WH, Hruban RH, Phelps TH and Isacson C, editors. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2002. 82-3
  9. Esendağlı G, Akarca FG, Balcı S, Argon A, Erhan Sş, Turhan N, Zengin Nİ, Keser SH, Çelik B, Bulut T, Abdullazade S, Erden E, Savaş B, Bostan T, Sağol Ö, Ağalar AA, Kepil N, Karslıoğlu Y, Günal A, Markoç F, Saka B, Özgün G, Özdamar ŞO, Bahadır B, Kaymaz E, Işık E, Ayhan S, Tunçel D, Yılmaz BÖ, Çelik S, Karabacak T, Seven İE, Çelikel ÇA, Gücin Z, Ekinci Ö, Akyol G. A retrospective evaluation of the epithelial changes/lesions and neoplasms of the gallbladder in Turkey and a review of the existing sampling methods: A multicentre study. Turk Patoloji Derg. 2018;34:41-8
  10. Adsay NV. Gallbladder, extrahepatic biliary tree, and ampulla. In: Sternberg’s diagnostic surgical pathology, Mills SE, editor. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2015. 1770
  11. Albores-Saavedra J, Henson DE, Klimstra DS. Benign epithelial tumors of the gallbladder. In: AFIP Atlas of Tumor Pathology. fourth series. Tumors of the gallbladder, extrahepatic bile ducts and vaterian system. Maryland: ARP Silver Spring;