Badanale R, Rekhi B, Jambhekar N A, Gulia A, Bajpai J, Laskar S, Khanna N, Chinnaswamy G, Puri A
Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Indian J Cancer. 2017 Apr-Jun;54(2):401-408. doi: 10.4103/ijc.IJC_259_17.
To review various pathologic parameters in diagnosed cases of trunk and extremity-based soft tissue tumors (STTs), in order to identify concordance rate between initial biopsy and resection specimen and discrepancies between initial and review diagnosis, by a specialist pathologist.
Over a 2-year-period, 400 retrospectively diagnosed STTs (553 specimens) including referral and "in-house" cases were studied. The reviewing specialist pathologist was blinded to the initial diagnoses. Discordances including discrepancies and deficiencies were defined as major and minor. Major discrepancies included those that could lead to significant treatment changes. True discrepancies were those related to sampling issues between the biopsies and resection specimens. Deficiencies relating to tumor subtyping, sarcoma grading, documentation of tumor size, and marginal status (in resections) were subdivided as major and minor.
Most cases (328, 82%) were sarcomas (most common, synovial sarcoma; most common Stage, III), followed by benign tumors (36, 9%) (most common, schwannoma) and intermediate malignancies (32, 8%) (most common, fibromatosis). Within STTs, liposarcomas, neural tumors, and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas were relatively more frequently associated with discrepancies. Percentage of cases with major discordances between the referral reports (100 cases) and review diagnosis was 60%. Percentage of cases with major discordances between the specialist and other oncopathologists was 11%. True discrepancies were observed in 20 (5%) cases. The association of type of specimen with the rate of discordance was not significant (P = 0.114).
Diagnoses of STTs are fraught with errors mostly from general pathologists, followed by nonspecialist oncopathologists. These findings reinforce the need for reporting of STTs, especially sarcomas, by specialist pathologists.
由一名专业病理学家回顾躯干和四肢软组织肿瘤(STT)确诊病例的各种病理参数,以确定初次活检与切除标本之间的符合率以及初次诊断与复查诊断之间的差异。
在两年期间,对400例回顾性诊断的STT(553份标本)进行了研究,包括转诊病例和“内部”病例。负责复查的专业病理学家对初次诊断不知情。将不一致情况(包括差异和不足)分为主要和次要两类。主要差异包括那些可能导致重大治疗改变的情况。真正的差异是指活检与切除标本之间与取材问题相关的差异。与肿瘤亚型、肉瘤分级、肿瘤大小记录以及(切除标本中的)切缘状态相关的不足分为主要和次要两类。
大多数病例(328例,82%)为肉瘤(最常见的是滑膜肉瘤;最常见的分期是III期),其次是良性肿瘤(36例,9%)(最常见的是神经鞘瘤)和中间型恶性肿瘤(32例,8%)(最常见的是纤维瘤病)。在STT中,脂肪肉瘤、神经肿瘤和未分化多形性肉瘤相对更常出现差异。转诊报告(100例)与复查诊断之间存在主要不一致的病例百分比为60%。专家与其他肿瘤病理学家之间存在主要不一致的病例百分比为11%。在20例(5%)病例中观察到真正的差异。标本类型与不一致率之间的关联不显著(P = 0.114)。
STT的诊断充满错误,大多来自普通病理学家,其次是非专科肿瘤病理学家。这些发现强化了由专业病理学家报告STT(尤其是肉瘤)的必要性。