Background/Aims: Gallbladder specimens are routinely sent for histopathological examination after cholecystectomy in order to rule out the presence of gallbladder carcinoma (GBC). However, there is no evidence for the benefit of this costly practice. Our aim was to determine whether a selective strategy based on macroscopic appearance of gallbladder specimens is a reliable strategy to exclude them from histopathological examination. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted from January 2007 until November 2011 in a large community hospital in the Netherlands. All gallbladder specimen reports (n = 1,393) after cholecystectomy were included and searched for abnormal findings. Reports were excluded when a full histopathological report was not available (n = 18). Results: Out of the 1,375 patients, 185 had a macroscopically abnormal gallbladder specimen. Of these patients, 6 had GBC. All patients with GBC had macroscopic abnormalities, giving a negative predictive value of 100% to exclude gallbladder specimens from histopathological examination based on macroscopic abnormalities. Conclusions: Based on our study it seems justified to exclude gallbladder specimens from histopathological examination based on the absence of macroscopic abnormalities. A more selective policy will reduce medical costs, saving EUR 1.3 million a year in the Netherlands alone, whilst maintaining patient safety.

No abstract

Background There is ongoing debate concerning the necessity of routine histopathological examination following cholecystectomy. In order to reduce the pathology workload and save costs, a selective approach has been suggested, but evidence regarding its oncological safety is lacking. Methods In this multicentre, prospective, cross-sectional study, all gallbladders removed for gallstone disease or cholecystitis were systematically examined by the surgeon for macroscopic abnormalities indicative of malignancy. Before sending all specimens to the pathologist, the surgeon judged whether histopathological examination was indicated. The main outcomes were the number of patients with hypothetically missed malignancy with clinical consequences (upper limit two-sided 95 per cent c.i. below 3:1000 considered oncologically safe) and potential cost savings of selective histopathological examination. Results Twenty-two (2.19:1000) of 10 041 specimens exhibited malignancy with clinical consequences. In case of a selective policy, surgeons would have held back 7846 of 10041 (78.1 per cent) gallbladders from histopathological examination. Malignancy with clinical consequences would have been missed in seven of 7846 patients (0.89:1000, upper limit 95% c.i. 1.40:1000). No patient benefitted from the clinical consequences, while two were harmed (futile additional surgery). Of 15 patients in whom malignancy with clinical consequences would have been diagnosed, one benefitted (residual disease radically removed), two potentially benefitted (palliative systemic therapy), and four experienced harm (futile additional surgery). Estimated cost savings established by replacing routine for selective histopathological examination were €703 500 per 10 000 patients. Conclusion Selective histopathological examination following cholecystectomy is oncologically safe and could reduce pathology workload, costs, and futile re-resections.

To investigate the oncological safety and potential cost savings of selective histopathological examination after appendectomy. Background: The necessity of routine histopathological examination after appendectomy has been questioned, but prospective studies investigating the safety of a selective policy are lacking.Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional study, inspection and palpation of the (meso)appendix was performed by the surgeon in patients with suspected appendicitis. The surgeon's opinion on additional value of histopathological examination was reported before sending all specimens to the pathologist. Main outcomes were the number of hypothetically missed appendiceal neoplasms From the