| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.38 MB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
In 2020, uterine cancer was the sixth most common cancer in women worldwide and the fourth in the United Kingdom. By 2040, its incidence rate could rise by 20.5%, and mortality by 32.9% in the United Kingdom. Suboptimal gross dissection methods can irreversibly compromise histopathological assessment, impacting on staging accuracy, treatment, and quality of care. This report aims to study the advantages and disadvantages of an alternative dissection technique in the histopathological assessment of hysterectomy specimens with
endometrial carcinoma, using a traditional dissection technique as a reference standard. A qualitative comparison analysis was performed based on data collected from a
literature review, informal interviews with departmental gynaecological pathologists, and
case analyses from the histopathology department of Portsmouth Hospital University.
While the traditional dissection technique is well-established in the literature,
cheaper and provides clearer visualisation of specific areas, the alternative dissection
technique introduces significant improvements in both macroscopic and microscopic
procedures. It adds a clearer three-dimensional understanding of the tumour/specimen
and a more comprehensive assessment of myometrial invasion.
This report clarified advantages and disadvantages of both methods, highlighting
the alternative dissection method as a step up in terms of efficiency in the histopathological
assessment of hysterectomy specimens. Ultimately, this study is the first to describe and
document this alternative method.
Description
Keywords
Endometrial carcinoma Hysterectomy Gross dissection Myometrial invasion Pathological staging