Dohar J E, Bonilla J A
Department of Pediatric Otolaryngology, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996 Jul;115(1):94-7. doi: 10.1016/S0194-5998(96)70143-2.
The best means of pathologically examining routine tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy specimens in children remains controversial. Otolaryngologists fear missing an unsuspected diagnosis. However, the cost-effectiveness of microscopic analysis, given the rare incidence of unsuspected diagnosis, is questionable. If a significant pathologic diagnosis is missed, the medicolegal implications could be significant. A questionnaire was sent to 111 members of the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology. Additionally, we reviewed our experience at the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh for the 5-year span from 1989 to 1994 to determine our incidence of unsuspected pathologic diagnoses. Sixty-five questionnaires were returned (59% response rate). More than half (56%) of the respondents stated that microscopic analysis was routinely performed on all specimens, and 42% replied that only gross examination was performed, reserving microscopic examination for selected cases. Three respondents said that they discarded their specimens in the operating room. From March 1989 to October 1994, in 1985 children undergoing bilateral tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy at the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, no significant pathologic diagnoses were found. Twenty-seven additional children who underwent only tonsillectomy between January 1991 and October 1994 were also reviewed. One lymphoma, suspected before surgery, and a glycogen storage disorder, not suspected before surgery, were diagnosed. Therefore, in a total of 2012 children, we found only one clinically significant unsuspected diagnosis. In conclusion, we found no national consensus governing the best way to examine routine adenotonsillectomy specimens in children. Given that unsuspected diagnoses are rare, reserving microscopic analysis for specific clinical indications may be both more cost-effective and medically feasible.
对儿童常规扁桃体切除术和腺样体切除术标本进行病理学检查的最佳方法仍存在争议。耳鼻喉科医生担心漏诊未被怀疑的疾病。然而,考虑到未被怀疑疾病的发病率很低,显微镜分析的成本效益值得怀疑。如果漏诊了重大病理诊断,其法医学后果可能很严重。我们向美国儿科学会耳鼻喉科的111名成员发送了一份调查问卷。此外,我们回顾了1989年至1994年这5年期间匹兹堡儿童医院的经验,以确定我们未被怀疑的病理诊断发生率。共收回65份问卷(回复率为59%)。超过一半(56%)的受访者表示,对所有标本都常规进行显微镜分析,42%的受访者回复说只进行大体检查,仅对特定病例进行显微镜检查。三名受访者表示他们在手术室丢弃了标本。1989年3月至1994年10月,在匹兹堡儿童医院接受双侧扁桃体切除术和腺样体切除术的1985名儿童中,未发现重大病理诊断。还对1991年1月至1994年10月期间仅接受扁桃体切除术的另外27名儿童进行了回顾。诊断出1例术前怀疑的淋巴瘤和1例术前未怀疑的糖原贮积病。因此,在总共2012名儿童中,我们仅发现1例临床上重大的未被怀疑的诊断。总之,我们发现对于检查儿童常规腺样体扁桃体切除术标本的最佳方法,尚未形成全国性共识。鉴于未被怀疑的诊断很少见,仅对特定临床指征进行显微镜分析可能在成本效益和医学可行性方面都更高。