• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

淋巴结的外科病理学检查。美国临床病理学家学会的实践调查。

Surgical pathology examination of lymph nodes. Practice survey by American Society of Clinical Pathologists.

作者信息

Cousar J B

机构信息

Department of Pathology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

出版信息

Am J Clin Pathol. 1995 Aug;104(2):126-32. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/104.2.126.

DOI:10.1093/ajcp/104.2.126
PMID:7639185
Abstract

The American Society of Clinical Pathologists surveyed 363 pathologists to determine practices used in processing and reporting lymph node specimens submitted for surgical pathology examination. This topic is of interest because lymph nodes are some of the more common organs biopsied for diagnostic purposes and the constant change in and diversity of classification systems in the past 30 years. The definition of newly recognized entities and the use of sophisticated diagnostic tools also have made it difficult for there to be a solid consensus of pathologists in diagnosing lymphoproliferative disorders for correlation with clinical behavior and response to therapy. The survey, conducted in November 1992, contained 79 questions. Participants were selected to represent a variety of practice settings and 179 (49%) responses were received.

摘要

美国临床病理学家协会对363名病理学家进行了调查,以确定在处理和报告提交用于外科病理检查的淋巴结标本时所采用的方法。这个主题之所以受到关注,是因为淋巴结是一些较常见的用于诊断目的的活检器官,并且在过去30年里分类系统不断变化且多样。新认识实体的定义以及复杂诊断工具的使用,也使得病理学家在诊断淋巴增生性疾病以与临床行为和治疗反应相关联方面难以达成坚实的共识。该调查于1992年11月进行,包含79个问题。参与者的选择代表了各种实践环境,共收到179份(49%)回复。

相似文献

1
Surgical pathology examination of lymph nodes. Practice survey by American Society of Clinical Pathologists.淋巴结的外科病理学检查。美国临床病理学家学会的实践调查。
Am J Clin Pathol. 1995 Aug;104(2):126-32. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/104.2.126.
2
Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of lymphoproliferative disorders--interpretations based on morphologic criteria alone: results from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytopathology.淋巴增生性疾病的细针穿刺活检——仅基于形态学标准的解读:美国病理学家学会非妇科细胞病理学实验室间比对项目的结果
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006 Dec;130(12):1766-71. doi: 10.5858/2006-130-1766-FABOLD.
3
Fine needle aspiration cytopathology of malignant lymphoma.恶性淋巴瘤的细针穿刺细胞病理学
Clin Lab Med. 1998 Sep;18(3):541-59, vi-vii.
4
Barriers to optimal assessment of lymph nodes in colorectal cancer specimens.结直肠癌标本中淋巴结最佳评估的障碍。
Am J Clin Pathol. 2004 May;121(5):663-70. doi: 10.1309/17VK-M33B-FXF9-T8WD.
5
Image-guided core needle biopsy in the diagnosis of malignant lymphoma.影像引导下粗针穿刺活检在恶性淋巴瘤诊断中的应用
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015 Jul;41(7):852-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.04.015. Epub 2015 May 5.
6
Mammographically directed breast biopsies: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of clinical physician expectations and of specimen handling and reporting characteristics in 434 institutions.乳腺X线引导下的乳房活检:美国病理学家学会Q-Probes对434家机构中临床医生期望以及标本处理和报告特征的研究。
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997 Jan;121(1):11-8.
7
[Thin-needle aspiration cytology of palpable lymph nodes. Analysis of 702 consecutive cases].[可触及淋巴结的细针穿刺细胞学检查。702例连续病例分析]
Minerva Med. 1988 Sep;79(9):753-9.
8
Fine-needle aspiration biopsy for the diagnosis of lymphoma: a perspective.细针穿刺活检在淋巴瘤诊断中的应用:一种观点。
Diagn Cytopathol. 1996 Nov;15(4):352-7. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0339(199611)15:4<352::AID-DC21>3.0.CO;2-M.
9
An international survey-based study on colorectal cancer pathology reporting-guidelines versus local practice.一项基于国际调查的结直肠癌病理报告指南与当地实践的比较研究。
Virchows Arch. 2018 Dec;473(6):697-708. doi: 10.1007/s00428-018-2457-3. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
10
[Value of different surgical techniques for sampling biopsy material in the diagnosis of tuberculous spondylitis].[不同手术技术在结核性脊柱炎诊断中获取活检材料的价值]
Probl Tuberk Bolezn Legk. 2004(7):17-8.