Sellheyer Klaus, Bergfeld Wilma F
Department of Anatomic Pathology, Section of Dermatopathology, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, OH 44195, USA.
Arch Dermatol. 2006 Apr;142(4):455-9. doi: 10.1001/archderm.142.4.455.
To compare differences in biopsy techniques of actinic keratoses between dermatologists and plastic surgeons.
Blinded, comparative, retrospective study.
Dermatopathology laboratory at a major academic medical center with referral of outside cases. Intervention We reexamined the histopathologic slides of 405 actinic keratosis biopsy specimens obtained by plastic surgeons and dermatologists from January 1, 1992, through May 31, 2002. We were specifically interested in the type of biopsy technique (shave, punch, or excisional biopsy) used for the surgical management of actinic keratoses by both groups of physicians. We also recorded the clinical diagnoses rendered on the dermatopathology request form and compared them with the histopathologic diagnoses.
Excisional biopsies were performed by plastic surgeons in 50.0% of the cases, compared with only 1.4% by dermatologists. In contrast, shave biopsies of actinic keratoses were performed by plastic surgeons in only 32.4% of the cases, compared with 89.4% by dermatologists. Only 1 (0.5%) of the 198 dermatopathology request forms submitted by the plastic surgeons mentioned actinic keratosis, compared with 82 (39.6%) of 207 histopathologic evaluation requests submitted by dermatologists.
The predominance of excisional biopsies of actinic keratoses by plastic surgeons may be related to a different ability in the clinical recognition of actinic keratoses compared with that of dermatologists. The surgical approach of dermatologists to shave diagnostically uncertain cutaneous lesions is less invasive than that of plastic surgeons and is more likely to achieve a better cosmetic outcome.
比较皮肤科医生和整形外科医生对光化性角化病活检技术的差异。
双盲、对比、回顾性研究。
一家主要学术医学中心的皮肤病理学实验室,接收外部病例转诊。干预措施:我们重新检查了1992年1月1日至2002年5月31日期间整形外科医生和皮肤科医生获取的405份光化性角化病活检标本的组织病理学切片。我们特别关注两组医生用于光化性角化病手术治疗的活检技术类型(刮除术、钻孔术或切除活检)。我们还记录了皮肤病理学申请表上给出的临床诊断,并将其与组织病理学诊断进行比较。
整形外科医生在50.0%的病例中进行了切除活检,而皮肤科医生仅为1.4%。相比之下,整形外科医生仅在32.4%的病例中对光化性角化病进行了刮除活检,而皮肤科医生为89.4%。整形外科医生提交的198份皮肤病理学申请表中只有1份(0.5%)提到了光化性角化病,而皮肤科医生提交的207份组织病理学评估申请表中有82份(39.6%)提到了该病。
整形外科医生对光化性角化病进行切除活检占主导地位,这可能与他们在临床识别光化性角化病方面与皮肤科医生不同的能力有关。皮肤科医生对诊断不确定的皮肤病变采用刮除术的手术方法比整形外科医生的侵入性小,并且更有可能获得更好的美容效果。