No abstract

Background: The worldwide incidence of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) has increased. Efforts to reduce overtreatment follow two approaches: limiting diagnostic workup of low-risk thyroid nodules and pursuing active surveillance (AS) after diagnosis of microscopic PTC (mPTC). However, most studies on AS have been performed in countries with a relatively high proportion of overdiagnosis and thus incidental mPTC. The role of AS in a population with a restrictive diagnostic workup protocol for imaging and fine-needle aspiration remains unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe the proportion and characteristics of patients with mPTC in the Netherlands and to describe the potential candidates for AS in a situation with restrictive diagnostic protocols since 2007. Methods: All operated patients with an mPTC in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2015 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry database. Three groups were defined: (Group 1) mPTC with preoperative distant or lymph node metastases, (Group 2) mPTC in pathology report after thyroid surgery for another indication, and (Group 3) patients with a preoperative high suspicious thyroid nodule or proven mPTC (Bethesda 5 or 6). Only patients in Group 3 were considered potential candidates for AS. Results: A total of 1018 mPTC patients were identified. Group 1 consisted of 152 patients with preoperatively discovered metastases. Group 2 consisted of 667 patients, of whom 16 (2.4%) had lymph node metastases. There were 199 patients in Group 3, of whom 27 (13.6%) had lymph node metastases. After initial treatment in Group 3, 3.5% (7/199) of the patients had recurrence. Conclusions: Restrictive diagnostic workup strategies of patients with small thyroid nodules lead to limited patients eligible for AS and a higher incidence of lymph node metastases. We believe that there is limited additive value for AS in countries with restrictive diagnostic workup guidelines such as in the Netherlands. However, if an mPTC is encountered, AS can be offered on an individual basis.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

IntroductionThe incidence of gallstone disease is increasing and represents a strain on healthcare systems worldwide. Following cholecystectomy, gallbladder specimens are generally submitted for histopathologic examination and the diagnostic yield of this strategy remains questionable. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of routine pathologic examination of the gallbladder specimens and investigate the results of routine postoperative follow-up visits.MethodsAll cholecystectomies performed between January 2011 and July 2017 at a single center were evaluated. All gallbladder specimens were routinely pathologically examined. The outcome parameters were the macro- and microscopic gallbladder anomalies at pathology and the reported symptoms during routine follow-up visits 2–6 weeks after surgery.ResultsIn the study period a total of 2763 patients underwent cholecystectomy, of which 2615 had a postoperative visit in the outpatient clinic. Seventy-three patients (3%) complained of persistent abdominal pain, and 29 of these patients were referred for further treatment, resulting in a resolution of symptoms in 97%. Of all gallbladder specimens, 199 (7%) displayed macroscopic anomalies and in four (2%) of these, gallbladder carcinoma was diagnosed.DiscussionSelective pathologic examination of gallbladder specimens in case of macroscopic anomalies appears justified. Also routine follow-up after cholecystectomy appears not useful since 97% of patients do not report any symptoms at follow-up. A selective pathology and follow-up strategy could save significant healthcare costs.