• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Handling and reporting of pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens in prostate and bladder cancer: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology

S. Prendeville, DM. Berney, L. Bubendorf, E. Compérat, L. Egevad, O. Hes, G. Kristiansen, J. Oxley, GJLH. van Leenders, M. Varma, T. van der Kwast,

. 2019 ; 74 (6) : 844-852. [pub] 20190401

Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc19034847

AIMS: Pathological evaluation of lymphadenectomy specimens plays a pivotal role in accurate lymph node (LN) staging. Guidelines standardising the gross handling and reporting of pelvic LN dissection (PLND) in prostate (PCa) and bladder (BCa) cancer are currently lacking. This study aimed to establish current practice patterns of PLND evaluation among pathologists. METHODS AND RESULTS: A web-based survey was circulated to all members of the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP), comprising 29 questions focusing on the macroscopic handling, LN enumeration and reporting of PLND in PCa and BCa. Two hundred and eighty responses were received from pathologists throughout 23 countries. Only LNs palpable at grossing were submitted by 58%, while 39% routinely embedded the entire specimen. Average LN yield from PLND was ≥10 LNs in 56% and <10 LNs in 44%. Serial section(s) and immunohistochemistry were routinely performed on LN blocks by 42% and <1% of respondents, respectively. To designate a LN microscopically, 91% required a capsule/subcapsular sinus. In pN+ cases, 72% reported the size of the largest metastatic deposit and 94% reported extranodal extension. Isolated tumour cells were interpreted as pN1 by 77%. Deposits identified in fat without associated lymphoid tissue were reported as tumour deposits (pN0) by 36% and replaced LNs (pN+) by 27%. LNs identified in periprostatic fat were included in the PLND LN count by 69%. CONCLUSION: This study highlights variations in practice with respect to the gross sampling and microscopic evaluation of PLND in urological malignancies. A consensus protocol may provide a framework for more consistent and standardised reporting of PLND specimens.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19034847
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20191014101747.0
007      
ta
008      
191007s2019 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1111/his.13818 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30604878
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Prendeville, Susan $u Cork University Hospital, Cork, Ireland.
245    10
$a Handling and reporting of pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens in prostate and bladder cancer: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology / $c S. Prendeville, DM. Berney, L. Bubendorf, E. Compérat, L. Egevad, O. Hes, G. Kristiansen, J. Oxley, GJLH. van Leenders, M. Varma, T. van der Kwast,
520    9_
$a AIMS: Pathological evaluation of lymphadenectomy specimens plays a pivotal role in accurate lymph node (LN) staging. Guidelines standardising the gross handling and reporting of pelvic LN dissection (PLND) in prostate (PCa) and bladder (BCa) cancer are currently lacking. This study aimed to establish current practice patterns of PLND evaluation among pathologists. METHODS AND RESULTS: A web-based survey was circulated to all members of the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP), comprising 29 questions focusing on the macroscopic handling, LN enumeration and reporting of PLND in PCa and BCa. Two hundred and eighty responses were received from pathologists throughout 23 countries. Only LNs palpable at grossing were submitted by 58%, while 39% routinely embedded the entire specimen. Average LN yield from PLND was ≥10 LNs in 56% and <10 LNs in 44%. Serial section(s) and immunohistochemistry were routinely performed on LN blocks by 42% and <1% of respondents, respectively. To designate a LN microscopically, 91% required a capsule/subcapsular sinus. In pN+ cases, 72% reported the size of the largest metastatic deposit and 94% reported extranodal extension. Isolated tumour cells were interpreted as pN1 by 77%. Deposits identified in fat without associated lymphoid tissue were reported as tumour deposits (pN0) by 36% and replaced LNs (pN+) by 27%. LNs identified in periprostatic fat were included in the PLND LN count by 69%. CONCLUSION: This study highlights variations in practice with respect to the gross sampling and microscopic evaluation of PLND in urological malignancies. A consensus protocol may provide a framework for more consistent and standardised reporting of PLND specimens.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a internet $7 D020407
650    12
$a lymfadenektomie $7 D008197
650    12
$a lymfatické metastázy $x diagnóza $x patologie $7 D008207
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a staging nádorů $x metody $x normy $7 D009367
650    _2
$a chirurgická patologie $x metody $x normy $7 D010340
650    12
$a nádory prostaty $x patologie $7 D011471
650    _2
$a odběr biologického vzorku $x metody $x normy $7 D013048
650    _2
$a průzkumy a dotazníky $7 D011795
650    12
$a nádory močového měchýře $x patologie $7 D001749
651    _2
$a Evropa $7 D005060
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Berney, Daniel M $u Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
700    1_
$a Bubendorf, Lukas $u University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
700    1_
$a Compérat, Eva $u Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
700    1_
$a Egevad, Lars $u Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
700    1_
$a Hes, Ondrej $u Charles University Hospital, Plzen, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Kristiansen, Glen $u University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
700    1_
$a Oxley, Jon $u North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
700    1_
$a van Leenders, Geert J L H $u Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
700    1_
$a Varma, Murali $u University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
700    1_
$a van der Kwast, Theo $u University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
773    0_
$w MED00002043 $t Histopathology $x 1365-2559 $g Roč. 74, č. 6 (2019), s. 844-852
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30604878 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20191007 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20191014102211 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1451507 $s 1073397
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2019 $b 74 $c 6 $d 844-852 $e 20190401 $i 1365-2559 $m Histopathology $n Histopathology $x MED00002043
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20191007

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace