Epidemiologic Data, Tumor Size, Histologic Tumor Type and Grade, Pathologic Staging and Follow Up in Cancers of the Ampullary Region and Head of Pancreas in 311 Whipple Resection Specimens of Pakistani Patients

Impact Factors for Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality and Repercussion of Perioperative Morbidity and Long-term Survival in Pancreatic Head Resection

Background

The focus of the present study was to reveal any impact factors for perioperative morbidity and mortality as well as repercussion of perioperative morbidity on long-term survival in pancreatic head resection.

Patients and methods

In a retrospective study, clinic-pathological factors of 240 patients after pancreatic head (PD) or total resection were analyzed for correlations with morbidity, 30- and 90-day mortality, and long-term survival. According to Clavien–Dindo classification, all complications with grade II and more were defined as overall complications (OAC). OAC, all surgical (ASC), general (AGC) and some specific types of complications like leaks from the pancreatoenteric anastomosis (PEA) or pancreatic fistula (PF, type A, B and C), leaks from other anastomoses (OL), bleeding (BC) and abscesses (AA) were studied for correlation with clinic-pathological factors.

Results

In the 9-year period, altogether 240 patients had pancreatic resection. The incidence of OAC was 37.1%, ASC 29.2% and AGC 15.8%. ASC presented themselves as PL, OL, BC and AA in 19% (of 208 PD), 5.8%, 5.8%, and 2.5% respectively. Age, ASA score, amylase on drains, and pancreatic fistulas B and C correlated significantly with different types of complications. Overall 30- and 90-day mortalities were 5 and 7.9% and decreased to 3.5 and 5% in P2.

Conclusions

High amylase on drains and higher mean age were independent indicators of morbidity, whereas PL and BC revealed as independent predictor for 30-day mortality, and physical status, OAC and PF C for 90-day mortality.

Errors in Surgical Pathology Reports: a Study from a Major Center in Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Errors in surgical pathology diagnosis can have serious consequences for the patient. Since the final product of a surgical pathology lab is the report, errors can be picked by reviewing reports of cases.

AIM

To determine the frequency and types of error in surgical pathology reports of cases signed out in 2014 in a laboratory in Karachi, Pakistan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All surgical pathology reports in which changes were made in the original report after sign out and an amended report was issued were included. Errors included: (1) misinterpretations; (2) missing critical information; (3) erroneous critical information; (4) misidentification; and (5) typographic errors.

RESULTS

Errors were identified in 210 cases (0.37%). These comprised 199 formalin fixed specimens and 11 frozen sections. The latter represented 3.8% of a total of 2,170 frozen sections. Of the 11 frozen section errors, 10 were misinterpretations. Of the 199 permanent specimens, 99 (49.7%) were misinterpretations, 65 (32.7%) belonged to missing critical information category, 8 (4%) belonged to erroneous critical information category, 8(4%) were misidentifications, 16(8%) were typographic errors while 3 cases (1.5%) were other errors. Most misinterpretations occurred in the gastro intestinal, liver and pancreato biliary tract (23.2%) and breast (13.1%). Another 87 cases were reviewed on the clinicians' request. However diagnosis after review remained the same as the original diagnosis. In 49 out of these (56.3%), additional workup was performed at the time of the review.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings were similar to other published studies. We need to develop documented procedures for timely review of cases to detect errors.