Diagnostic Discrepancies between Intraoperative Cytological Frozen Section and Permeant Histopathological Diagnosis of Brain Tumors

M. Kurdi, Saleh Salem Baeesa, Yazid Maghrabi, A. Bardeesi, R. Saeedi, Taghreed Al-Sinani, A. Samkari, A. Lary
{"title":"Diagnostic Discrepancies between Intraoperative Cytological Frozen Section and Permeant Histopathological Diagnosis of Brain Tumors","authors":"M. Kurdi, Saleh Salem Baeesa, Yazid Maghrabi, A. Bardeesi, R. Saeedi, Taghreed Al-Sinani, A. Samkari, A. Lary","doi":"10.37421/2157-7099.2021.12.585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background: Intraoperative frozen section (IOFS) diagnosis of brain tumours plays an important role in assessing the adequacy of the sample and determining the treatment plan. Objective: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy between IOFS and permanent paraffin-embedded sections in the endpoint of surgery. Method: The authors reviewed the histopathological results of 383 brain tumours, including IOFS and permanent histological diagnosis. The cases were classified into three diagnostic compatibilities (i) Perfect fit; the diagnosis of IOFS was identical to the permanent diagnosis, (ii) Partial compatibility; IOFS diagnosis was not incorrect but was too broad to be considered full compatibility, (iii) Conflict; IOFS diagnosis is completely different from the permanent diagnosis. The permanent diagnosis used as a primary criterion was compared to the IOFS diagnosis and recurrence rate using different statistical methods. Results: The mean age of the whole cases was 37-years with male: female ratio 1:2. Around 84% of the patients underwent craniotomy and tumour resection, while 15% only underwent tumour biopsy. Approximately, 53.8% of the cases revealed perfect matching in the diagnosis between IOFSs and permanent sections, while 16.2% of the cases revealed complete mismatching in the diagnosis between the sections. The remaining 30% of the cases showed partial compatibility in the diagnosis between the two diagnostic methods. There was no significant difference in recurrence rate among all cases of different diagnostic compatibility (P-value= 0.54). Conclusion: There is a diagnostic discrepancy between IOFSs and permanent sections. However, cases that revealed no consensus in the diagnoses showed no negative effect on the patient outcome. Further studies should be conducted to explore the reasons of this conflict in the diagnosis between the two diagnostic methods. Keywords: Brain tumor • Histopathology • Frozen section • Diagnostic compatibility","PeriodicalId":15528,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cytology and Histology","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cytology and Histology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37421/2157-7099.2021.12.585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background: Intraoperative frozen section (IOFS) diagnosis of brain tumours plays an important role in assessing the adequacy of the sample and determining the treatment plan. Objective: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy between IOFS and permanent paraffin-embedded sections in the endpoint of surgery. Method: The authors reviewed the histopathological results of 383 brain tumours, including IOFS and permanent histological diagnosis. The cases were classified into three diagnostic compatibilities (i) Perfect fit; the diagnosis of IOFS was identical to the permanent diagnosis, (ii) Partial compatibility; IOFS diagnosis was not incorrect but was too broad to be considered full compatibility, (iii) Conflict; IOFS diagnosis is completely different from the permanent diagnosis. The permanent diagnosis used as a primary criterion was compared to the IOFS diagnosis and recurrence rate using different statistical methods. Results: The mean age of the whole cases was 37-years with male: female ratio 1:2. Around 84% of the patients underwent craniotomy and tumour resection, while 15% only underwent tumour biopsy. Approximately, 53.8% of the cases revealed perfect matching in the diagnosis between IOFSs and permanent sections, while 16.2% of the cases revealed complete mismatching in the diagnosis between the sections. The remaining 30% of the cases showed partial compatibility in the diagnosis between the two diagnostic methods. There was no significant difference in recurrence rate among all cases of different diagnostic compatibility (P-value= 0.54). Conclusion: There is a diagnostic discrepancy between IOFSs and permanent sections. However, cases that revealed no consensus in the diagnoses showed no negative effect on the patient outcome. Further studies should be conducted to explore the reasons of this conflict in the diagnosis between the two diagnostic methods. Keywords: Brain tumor • Histopathology • Frozen section • Diagnostic compatibility
脑肿瘤术中细胞学冰冻切片与病理组织学诊断的差异
背景:术中冷冻切片(IOFS)诊断脑肿瘤在评估样本是否充足、确定治疗方案方面具有重要作用。目的:探讨IOFS与永久石蜡包埋切片在手术终点诊断的准确性。方法:对383例脑肿瘤的组织病理学结果进行回顾性分析,包括IOFS和永久性组织学诊断。病例分为三种诊断兼容性(i)完全匹配;IOFS的诊断与永久性诊断相同,(ii)部分相容性;IOFS诊断并非不正确,但过于宽泛,不能视为完全相容;IOFS诊断与永久诊断完全不同。采用不同的统计方法,将永久诊断作为主要标准与IOFS诊断和复发率进行比较。结果:全部病例平均年龄37岁,男女比例1:2。约84%的患者接受了开颅和肿瘤切除术,而15%的患者仅接受了肿瘤活检。约53.8%的病例显示iofs与永久切片的诊断完全匹配,16.2%的病例显示两者之间的诊断完全不匹配。其余30%的病例在两种诊断方法的诊断中表现出部分相容性。不同诊断相容性病例的复发率差异无统计学意义(p值= 0.54)。结论:iofs与永久切片诊断存在差异。然而,在诊断中没有一致意见的病例对患者的预后没有负面影响。两种诊断方法在诊断上产生冲突的原因有待进一步研究。关键词:脑肿瘤;组织病理学;冷冻切片
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信