Comparing Pathology Report Quality Indicators in 2 Distinct Whipple Resection Specimen Protocols

Abstract

Objectives Pancreaticoduodenectomy specimens are complex, with varying gross examination techniques. In 2012, our institution began using axial sectioning. We sought to determine if this resulted in more complete pathology reporting. Methods Quality indicators were analyzed for pathology reports from 2 cohorts: 2001 to 2009 grossed traditionally and 2012 to 2017 using an axial technique (n = 81 and 51). Continuous and categorical data were compared using 2-tailed t test and Fisher exact test, respectively. Results The later cohort exhibited increased reporting of stage, lymphovascular invasion, margins/surfaces, mean number of lymph nodes, and mean number of slides (P < 0.01). No differences were seen in reporting of size, grade, or perineural invasion. In the later cohort, superior mesenteric vein/portal vein surface was positive in 17 cases (33%), showing strong correlation with superior mesenteric artery/uncinate margin involvement (13/17 cases; P = 0.0001). There was a higher rate of lymph node positivity (86% vs 65%, P < 0.01) in the later cohort. Conclusions There is a trend toward higher-quality pathology reports in 2012 to 2017. A possible drawback of the axial approach is increased histopathology slides. Potential additional contributors include College of American Pathologists protocols, increasing subspecialty practice, and updates to the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging criteria.