Chronic calculus cholecystitis: Is histopathology essential post-cholecystectomy?
Background: Carcinoma of the gall bladder (GB) is the most common malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract. One percent of cholecystectomy specimens show incidental gall bladder cancers (GBCs). Aim: Our aim of the study to was evaluate the utility of routine histopathology of cholecystectomy specime...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Indian journal of cancer 2020-01, Vol.57 (1), p.89-92 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background: Carcinoma of the gall bladder (GB) is the most common malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract. One percent of cholecystectomy specimens show incidental gall bladder cancers (GBCs).
Aim: Our aim of the study to was evaluate the utility of routine histopathology of cholecystectomy specimens removed with a diagnosis of gall bladder diseases (GBD).
Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was done reviewing the histopathological records of 906 patients who underwent cholecystectomy. Demographic details, gross findings, and microscopic findings noted. All the cases were categorized into two groups, A and B. Group A included the cases with any gross abnormality including wall thickness ≥4 mm and group B included rest of the cases.
Results: Majority of the patients were in the age group of 31-40 years of age. Out of 906 patients studied, majority of them were females with F:M ratio of 6.14:1. Of the 47 cases which were included in group A (with macroscopic abnormality), six cases had gall bladder carcinoma on microscopy. One case from group B with macroscopically normal-appearing GB had invasive carcinoma on microscopy. In our study, we found a sensitivity of 85.71% and specificity of 95.44%, while positive predictive value (PPV) was 91.11% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.65% of macroscopic abnormality in the diagnosis of invasive carcinoma.
Conclusion: All cholecystectomy specimens must be examined by histopathologists who must decide whether processing for microscopy is needed. Microscopic examination may be reserved for the specimen with a macroscopic lesion. This will result in a reduction of costs and pathology workload without compromising patient management. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0019-509X 1998-4774 |
DOI: | 10.4103/ijc.IJC_487_18 |