Suppr超能文献

食管腺癌内镜黏膜切除术标本解读中的观察者间差异:ER标本的解读

Inter-Observer Variability in the Interpretation of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Specimens of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: Interpretation of ER specimens.

作者信息

Worrell Stephanie G, Boys Joshua A, Chandrasoma Parakrama, Vallone John G, Dunst Christy M, Johnson Corey S, Lada Michael J, Louie Brian E, Watson Thomas J, DeMeester Steven R

机构信息

Surgery, University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo St, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.

Pathology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Jan;20(1):140-4; discussion 144-5. doi: 10.1007/s11605-015-3009-7. Epub 2015 Oct 26.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic resection (ER) has revolutionized the staging and therapy of superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma. Pathologic evaluation allows an assessment of the risk of lymph node metastases based on tumor characteristics. The aim of this study was to assess the inter-observer variability in pathologic assessment of ER specimens of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on ER specimens of superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma from four US institutions. Original endoscopic resection slides were re-reviewed by two blinded, experienced (study) gastrointestinal pathologists for the depth of tumor invasion, tumor grade, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Discordance was considered present only when both study pathologists disagreed with the original report.

RESULTS

There were 25 ER specimens reviewed for this study, and discordance occurred in 12 of the 25 specimens (48%) for the depth of tumor invasion. In most cases (83%), the discordance was related to overstaging a true T1a lesion. We found that only 38% of true T1a lesions were correctly staged for depth of invasion. Less commonly discordance was secondary to understaging a true T1b lesion. There was concordance between the two study pathologists in 22/25 cases (88%) on the depth of invasion. Discordance was present for tumor grade in 8/18 cases (44%) and for LVI in 4/16 cases (25%). Concordance between the study pathologists was 80% for tumor grade and 88% for LVI.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an alarmingly high rate of discordance (48%) between the study pathologists and the original pathology assessment for the depth of tumor invasion in ER specimens. This was particularly common for lesions called T1b on the original pathology report. Since critical decisions are made regarding esophageal preservation or esophagectomy on the basis of the pathologic interpretations of ER specimens, it behooves surgeons to understand the inter-observer variability. Review of ER specimens by an experienced GI pathologist is recommended to ensure that patients receive the appropriate treatment for superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma.

摘要

引言

内镜切除术(ER)彻底改变了浅表性食管腺癌的分期和治疗方式。病理评估可根据肿瘤特征评估淋巴结转移风险。本研究的目的是评估食管腺癌ER标本病理评估中的观察者间变异性。

方法

我们对来自美国四个机构的浅表性食管腺癌ER标本进行了一项回顾性研究。两位不知情的、经验丰富的(参与研究的)胃肠病理学家重新审查了原始内镜切除切片,以确定肿瘤浸润深度、肿瘤分级和是否存在淋巴管浸润(LVI)。仅当两位参与研究的病理学家均不同意原始报告时,才认为存在不一致。

结果

本研究共审查了25份ER标本,其中12份(48%)标本的肿瘤浸润深度存在不一致。在大多数情况下(83%),不一致与对真正的T1a病变过度分期有关。我们发现,只有38%的真正T1a病变在浸润深度方面得到了正确分期。较少见的不一致情况是对真正的T1b病变分期不足。两位参与研究的病理学家在22/25例(88%)病例的浸润深度上达成了一致。18例中有8例(44%)肿瘤分级存在不一致,16例中有4例(25%)LVI存在不一致。参与研究的病理学家在肿瘤分级方面的一致性为80%,在LVI方面为88%。

结论

在ER标本的肿瘤浸润深度方面,参与研究的病理学家与原始病理评估之间的不一致率高得惊人(48%)。这在原始病理报告中被称为T1b的病变中尤为常见。由于基于ER标本的病理解读会做出关于保留食管或食管切除术的关键决策,外科医生有必要了解观察者间变异性。建议由经验丰富的胃肠病理学家对ER标本进行复查,以确保患者接受针对浅表性食管腺癌的适当治疗。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验