Frozen section: history, indications, contraindications and quality assurance

Česká verzia

Authors: Marián Švajdler ^1,2; Peter Švajdler ³
Authors place of work: Šiklův ústav patologie, Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Lékařská fakulta v Plzni a Fakultní nemocnice Plzeň, Česká republika ¹; Bioptická laboratoř, s. r. o., Plzeň, Česká republika ²; Oddelenie patológie, Univerzitná nemocnica Louisa Pasteura, Košice, Slovenská Republika ³
Published in the journal: Čes.-slov. Patol., 54, 2018, No. 2, p. 58-62
Category: Přehledový článek

Summary

Frozen section represents one of the most imortant procedures carried out by the pathologist. At the same time, it’s one of the most difficult and most stressful tasks in the practice of pathology. The basic rule and the only correct indication for intraoperative consultation is that the result will determine the further conduction of the surgical procedure or will change the immediate patient care after operation. Successful accomplishment of intraoperative consultation requires knowledge of clinical history, familiarity with the surgical procedure technique, a keen knowledge of gross and microscopic pathology and a perfect work of the lab. Regular participation in quality assurance programs is associated with lower discordance rates between frozen section and final section diagnoses and a lower frequency of deferred diagnoses. Both the pathologist and the surgeon should realize the limitations of frozen section technique and, although no formal absolute contraindications to the use of frozen sections exist, there are situations when frozen section should be refused, although only after communication with the surgeon.

Keywords:

frozen section – history – indications – contraindications – quality assurance

Zdroje

1. Matěj R, Vedralová J, Koukolík F. Imunohistochemický průkaz TTF-1 v peroperačních bioptických vzorcích plicních adenokarcinomů: roční zkušenosti. Cesk Patol 2008; 44(2): 41-44.

2. Taxy JB. Frozen section and the surgical pathologist: a point of view. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009; 133(7): 1135-1138.

3. Montag AG. History of the frozen section. In: Taxy JB, Husain AN, Montag AG, eds. Biopsy interpretation: the frozen section. Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2014: 1–15.

4. Bloodgood JC. When cancer becomes a microscopic disease, there must be tissue diagnosis in the operating room. JAMA 1927; 88(13): 1022–1023.

5. Warren JC. The early diagnosis of malignant growths. Transactions of the American Surgical Association 1889; 7: 9-24.

6. Scully RE, Vickery AL. Surgical pathology at the hospitals of Harvard Medical School. In: Rosai J, ed. Guiding the surgeon’s hand: The History of American Surgical Pathology. Washington, DC, American Registry of Pathology; 1997: 87–110.

7. Carter D. Surgical pathology at Johns Hopkins. In: Rosai J, ed. Guiding the Surgeon’s Hand: The History of American Surgical Pathology. Washington, DC, American Registry of Pathology; 1997: 23–39.

8. Cullen TS. A rapid method of making permanent sections from frozen sections by the use of formalin. Johns Hopkins Hosp Bull 1895; 6(49): 67.

9. Pick L. A rapid method of preparing permanent sections for microscopical diagnosis. BMJ 1897; 1(1881): 140–141.

10. Wilson LB. A method for the rapid preparation of fresh tissues for the microscope. JAMA 1905; 45(23): 1737.

11. Woolner LB. Surgical pathology at the Mayo Clinic. In: Rosai J, ed. Guiding the Surgeon’s Hand: The History of American Surgical Pathology. Washington, DC: American Registry of Pathology; 1997: 145–179.

12. Wilson LB. The microscopic examinations of fresh tissues for the diagnosis of early cancer. St Paul Med J 1913; 15(6): 274-278.

13. Wilson LB. Microscopic examination of fresh tissue, and necropsy service in relation to surgery. Ann Surg 1925; 81(4): 863-868.

14. Zarbo RJ, Hoffman GG, Howanitz PJ. Interinstitutional comparison of frozen-section consultation. A College of American Pathologists Q-Probe study of 79,647 consultations in 297 North American institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1991; 115(12): 1187-1194.

15. Jaafar H. Intra-operative frozen section consultation: concepts, applications and limitations. Malays J Med Sci 2006; 13(1): 4-12.

16. Lechago J. The frozen section: pathology in the trenches. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005; 129(12): 1529-1531.

17. Nakhleh RE. Quality in surgical pathology communication and reporting. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011; 135(11): 1394-1397.

18. Wells CA. Quality assurance guidelines for pathology. Open biopsy and resection specimens. In: Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland S, von Karsa L, eds. European Commission. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis (4th ed). Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2006: 257-311.

19. Smith-Zagone MJ, Schwartz MR. Frozen section of skin specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005; 129(12): 1536-1543.

20. LiVolsi VA, Baloch ZW. Use and abuse of frozen section in the diagnosis of follicular thyroid lesions. Endocr Pathol 2005; 16(4): 285-293.

21. Younes M. Frozen section of the gastrointestinal tract, appendix, and peritoneum. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005; 129(12): 1558-1564.

22. Howanitz PJ, Hoffman GG, Zarbo RJ. The accuracy of frozen-section diagnoses in 34 hospitals. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1990; 114(4): 355-359.

23. Hayes MM, Jones EA, Zhang DY. Diagnoses made by frozen-section examination of surgical specimens in a small Canadian hospital. Can J Surg 1993; 36(3): 236-240.

24. Ahmad Z, Barakzai MA, Idrees R, Bhurgri Y. Correlation of intra-operative frozen section consultation with the final diagnosis at a referral center in Karachi, Pakistan. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2008; 51(4): 469-473.

25. Winther C, Graem N. Accuracy of frozen section diagnosis: a retrospective analysis of 4785 cases. APMIS 2011; 119(4-5): 259-262.

26. Mahe E, Ara S, Bishara M, et al. Intraoperative pathology consultation: error, cause and impact. Can J Surg 2013; 56(3): E13-18.

27. Hatami H, Mohsenifar Z, Alavi SN. The Diagnostic accuracy of frozen section compared to permanent section: a single center study in Iran. Iran J Pathol 2015; 10(4): 295-299.

28. Sams SB, Wisell JA. Discordance between intraoperative consultation by frozen section and final diagnosis. Int J Surg Pathol 2017; 25(1): 41-50.

29. Raab SS, Tworek JA, Souers R, Zarbo RJ. The value of monitoring frozen section-permanent section correlation data over time. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006; 130(3): 337-342.

30. Scucchi LF, Di Stefano D, Cosentino L, Vecchione A. Value of cytology as an adjunctive intraoperative diagnostic method. An audit of 2,250 consecutive cases. Acta Cytol 1997; 41(5): 1489-1496.

31. Shidham V, Gupta D, Galindo LM, et al. Intraoperative scrape cytology: comparison with frozen sections, using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Diagn Cytopathol 2000; 23(2): 134-139.