Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Vet Surg. 2021 Feb;50(2):259-272. doi: 10.1111/vsu.13539. Epub 2020 Dec 16.
To identify which classification systems have been used for tumor margin reporting and to determine whether factors (publication year, tumor type, and specialty of the contributing authors) influenced trends in margin reporting within literature describing canine soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and cutaneous mast cell tumors (MCT).
Systematic literature review.
Eligible articles were identified through electronic database searches performed for STS and MCT. Data abstracted from relevant studies included publication year, author list, specialty of contributing authors, criteria used to report the planned surgical margins, and the status of histologic margins. Categorization of papers was based on the classification systems used to report surgical and histologic tumor margins.
Fifty-three articles were included, 11 on STS, 37 on MCT, and five that included both tumor types. Criteria for classifying the planned surgical margins were described in only 50.9% of studies. Articles that listed a veterinary surgeon as a contributing author (P = .01) and STS articles compared to MCT papers (P = .01) were more likely to report surgical margins. Most (56.6%) studies reported the status of histologic margins dichotomously as "complete" or "incomplete." Although a previously published consensus statement recommended that quantitative criteria be used to report histologic margins, only 7.5% of articles used quantitative methods.
Classification systems used for reporting tumor margins were highly variable among studies.
The findings of this review provide evidence that a standardized classification system for reporting surgical and histologic tumor margins is required in veterinary medicine. A universal system may support more consistent reporting of neoplastic biopsy specimens and allow for more meaningful comparisons across research studies.
确定用于肿瘤边缘报告的分类系统，并确定是否有因素（出版年份、肿瘤类型和贡献作者的专业）影响描述犬软组织肉瘤（STS）和皮肤肥大细胞瘤（MCT）文献中边缘报告的趋势。
系统文献回顾。
通过对 STS 和 MCT 进行电子数据库搜索，确定了合格的文章。从相关研究中提取的数据包括出版年份、作者名单、贡献作者的专业、报告计划手术边缘的标准以及组织学边缘的状态。根据用于报告手术和组织学肿瘤边缘的分类系统对论文进行分类。
共纳入 53 篇文章，11 篇关于 STS，37 篇关于 MCT，5 篇同时包括这两种肿瘤类型。仅 50.9%的研究描述了分类计划手术边缘的标准。列出兽医作为贡献作者的文章（P =.01）和 STS 文章与 MCT 论文相比（P =.01）更有可能报告手术边缘。大多数（56.6%）研究将组织学边缘的状态二分为“完整”或“不完整”。尽管先前的共识声明建议使用定量标准来报告组织学边缘，但只有 7.5%的文章使用了定量方法。
用于报告肿瘤边缘的分类系统在研究之间差异很大。
本综述的结果提供了证据，表明在兽医领域需要一种用于报告手术和组织学肿瘤边缘的标准化分类系统。通用系统可能支持更一致地报告肿瘤活检标本，并允许在研究之间进行更有意义的比较。
