Thway Khin, Wang Jayson, Mubako Taka, Fisher Cyril
Sarcoma Unit, Department of Histopathology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 203 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK.
Sarcoma. 2014;2014:686902. doi: 10.1155/2014/686902. Epub 2014 Aug 5.
Introduction. Soft tissue tumour pathology is a highly specialised area of surgical pathology, but soft tissue neoplasms can occur at virtually all sites and are therefore encountered by a wide population of surgical pathologists. Potential sarcomas require referral to specialist centres for review by pathologists who see a large number of soft tissue lesions and where appropriate ancillary investigations can be performed. We have previously assessed the types of diagnostic discrepancies between referring and final diagnosis for soft tissue lesions referred to our tertiary centre. We now reaudit this 6 years later, assessing changes in discrepancy patterns, particularly in relation to the now widespread use of ancillary molecular diagnostic techniques which were not prevalent in our original study. Materials and Methods. We compared the sarcoma unit's histopathology reports with referring reports on 348 specimens from 286 patients with suspected or proven soft tissue tumours in a one-year period. Results. Diagnostic agreement was seen in 250 cases (71.8%), with 57 (16.4%) major and 41 (11.8%) minor discrepancies. There were 23 cases of benign/malignant discrepancies (23.5% of all discrepancies). 50 ancillary molecular tests were performed, 33 for aiding diagnosis and 17 mutational analyses for gastrointestinal stromal tumour to guide therapy. Findings from ancillary techniques contributed to 3 major and 4 minor discrepancies. While the results were broadly similar to those of the previous study, there was an increase in frequency of major discrepancies. Conclusion. Six years following our previous study and notably now in an era of widespread ancillary molecular diagnosis, the overall discrepancy rate between referral and tertiary centre diagnosis remains similar, but there is an increase in frequency of major discrepancies likely to alter patient management. A possible reason for the increase in major discrepancies is the increasing lack of exposure to soft tissue cases in nonspecialist centres in a time of subspecialisation. The findings support the national guidelines in which all suspected soft tissue tumour pathology specimens should be referred to a specialist sarcoma unit.
引言。软组织肿瘤病理学是外科病理学中一个高度专业化的领域,但软组织肿瘤实际上可发生于所有部位,因此众多外科病理学家都会遇到此类肿瘤。潜在的肉瘤需要转诊至专科中心,由看过大量软组织病变的病理学家进行评估,并在适当时开展辅助检查。我们之前曾评估过转诊诊断与最终诊断之间的差异类型,这些病例均为转诊至我们三级中心的软组织病变。现在,我们在6年后重新进行审核,评估差异模式的变化,特别是考虑到目前广泛使用的辅助分子诊断技术,而这些技术在我们最初的研究中并不普遍。
材料与方法。我们将肉瘤科室的组织病理学报告与转诊报告进行了比较,这些转诊报告来自286例疑似或确诊软组织肿瘤患者的348份标本,时间跨度为一年。
结果。250例(71.8%)诊断结果一致,57例(16.4%)存在主要差异,41例(11.8%)存在次要差异。有23例存在良恶性差异(占所有差异的23.5%)。共进行了50项辅助分子检测,其中33项用于辅助诊断,17项用于胃肠道间质瘤的突变分析以指导治疗。辅助技术的检测结果导致了3项主要差异和4项次要差异。虽然结果与之前的研究大致相似,但主要差异的频率有所增加。
结论。在我们之前的研究6年后,特别是在目前辅助分子诊断广泛应用的时代,转诊诊断与三级中心诊断之间的总体差异率仍然相似,但主要差异的频率有所增加,这可能会改变患者的治疗管理。主要差异增加的一个可能原因是在专科化时代,非专科中心接触软组织病例的机会越来越少。这些发现支持了国家指南,即所有疑似软组织肿瘤病理标本都应转诊至专科肉瘤科室。