Intraoperative Diagnosis of Central Nervous System Tumors: Challenges, Errors, Lessons Learned, and the Surgeon’s Perspective

Abstract

Background: Intraoperative crush smear is an adjuvant in diagnosing central nervous system (CNS) lesions on tissue sent for frozen section. Besides rapid decision-making, it also ensures that minimum injury is caused to the normal brain structures surrounding the intracranial neoplasm. A rapid intraoperative diagnosis helps the surgeon in planning the appropriate surgery.Objective: Our objective is to review all the discordant cases between intraoperative and histopathological diagnosis and also to study the crush smear slides for morphological clues that could have been helpful in minimizing such errors, especially for an inexperienced neuropathologist/general pathologist. The surgeon's perspective on the impact of these errors on management is also discussed.Method: A prospective study of six years from 2013 to 2019 was conducted. Crush smears were made and stained with rapid hematoxylin and eosin (H&E). The rest of the tissue was processed for permanent tissue sections. Slides in which there was discordance between the intraoperative and permanent paraffin sections were reviewed to ascertain the reasons thereof.Results: A total of 81 specimens of CNS tumors were sent for intraoperative consultation. Out of these, discordance was seen in 13 (16%) cases. Conclusion:To minimize diagnostic errors, it is important to do regular analyses of the misinterpreted cases. Knowledge of the pre-operative radiological differential diagnosis is mandatory. Discussion with the surgeon regarding the clinical impact of the errors made will give a clearer picture to the pathologists regarding clinically relevant reporting during intraoperative consultation.

Diagnostic utility of intraoperative squash smear cytology of Intra-cranial lesions in a resource limited setup of central India

“…Hence a final diagnosis of reactive gliosis was given. Khonglah 18 et al reported same error in their study.…”

“…Diagnostic error on cytology was due to sampling from the non-representative area by the surgeon. Khonglah 18 et al also reported case of hemangioblastoma misdiagnosed as low-grade glioma.…”