A Comparison of Tenosynovial and Transverse Carpal Ligament Biopsy for Amyloid Detection in Open Carpal Tunnel Release.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to compare differences in the incidence of amyloid deposition in tenosynovium (TS) versus transverse carpal ligament (TCL) biopsies obtained during open carpal tunnel release. We hypothesized that the incidence of amyloid would be similar between TCL and TS when obtaining both specimens from the same patient. METHODS: All primary, elective open carpal tunnel release cases that underwent biopsy for amyloid between January 2022 and September 2023 were reviewed. Tenosynovial and TCL specimens were independently evaluated by a pathologist to assess for amyloid. Demographic data were collected, and incidence of amyloid deposition was compared between the two samples. Agreement statistics, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for TCL, using TS as the reference standard. RESULTS: A total of 196 cases met either Tier 1 (n=180) or Tier 2 (n=16) biopsy criteria. Forty-eight cases were excluded for missed biopsies or laboratory processing errors, leaving 148 cases available for analysis. Amyloid deposition was present in 31 out of 148 (21%) TS specimens and 33 out of 148 (22%) TCL specimens. Overall, the results of the TS biopsy agreed with TCL biopsy in 138 out of 148 cases (93%). In the 10 cases for which the results of the TCL and TS biopsy differed, six cases had (+) TCL and (-) TS, and four cases had amyloid deposition in TS without evidence of deposition in the TCL. Sensitivity and specificity values for the TCL specimen were 87% and 95%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 82% and 97%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For cases of open carpal tunnel release undergoing biopsy, amyloid deposition was noted in 21% of TS specimens and 22% of TCL specimens. Results of TS and TCL biopsies obtained from the same patient agreed in 93% of cases. Single-source biopsy for amyloid represents a reasonable diagnostic approach. Future cost analyses should be performed to determine whether the addition of two biopsy sources to improve diagnostic accuracy is justified. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.

Utility of artificial intelligence in a binary classification of soft tissue tumors.

Soft tissue tumors (STTs) pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to their rarity, complexity, and morphological overlap. Accurate differentiation between benign and malignant STTs is important to set treatment directions, however, this task can be difficult. The integration of machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) models can potentially be helpful in classifying these tumors. The aim of this study was to investigate AI and machine learning tools in the classification of STT into benign and malignant categories. This study consisted of three components: (1) Evaluation of whole-slide images (WSIs) to classify STT into benign and malignant entities. Five specialized soft tissue pathologists from different medical centers independently reviewed 100 WSIs, representing 100 different cases, with limited clinical information and no additional workup. The results showed an overall concordance rate of 70.4% compared to the reference diagnosis. (2) Identification of cell-specific parameters that can distinguish benign and malignant STT. Using an image analysis software (QuPath) and a cohort of 95 cases, several cell-specific parameters were found to be statistically significant, most notably cell count, nucleus/cell area ratio, nucleus hematoxylin density mean, and cell max caliper. (3) Evaluation of machine learning library (Scikit-learn) in differentiating benign and malignant STTs. A total of 195 STT cases (156 cases in the training group and 39 cases in the validation group) achieved approximately 70% sensitivity and specificity, and an AUC of 0.68. Our limited study suggests that the use of WSI and AI in soft tissue pathology has the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and identify parameters that can differentiate between benign and malignant STTs. We envision the integration of AI as a supportive tool to augment the pathologists' diagnostic capabilities.

A Comparison of Amyloid Deposition in Endoscopic and Open Carpal Tunnel Release.

PURPOSE: Previous investigations assessing the incidence of amyloidosis detected with biopsy during carpal tunnel release (CTR) have focused on open CTR (OCTR). Prior authors have suggested that biopsy may be more technically challenging during endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR). Our purpose was to compare differences in the incidence of amyloid deposition detected during ECTR versus OCTR. METHODS: We reviewed all primary ECTR and OCTR during which a biopsy for amyloid was obtained between February 2022 and June 2023. All procedures were performed by five upper-extremity surgeons from a single institution. Congo red staining was used to determine the presence of amyloid deposition in either the transverse carpal ligament (TCL) or tenosynovium. All positive cases underwent subtype analysis and protein identification through liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Baseline demographics were recorded for each case, and the incidence of positive biopsy was compared between ECTR and OCTR cases. RESULTS: A total of 282 cases were included for analysis (143 ECTR and 139 OCTR). The mean age was 67 years, and 45% of cases were women. Baseline demographics were similar except for a significantly higher incidence of diabetes in OCTR cases (13% vs 33%). Overall, 13% of CTR cases had a positive biopsy. There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of amyloid deposition detected during biopsy in ECTR cases (3.5%) compared with OCTR cases (23%). CONCLUSIONS: Biopsy performed during ECTR may result in a lower incidence of amyloid detection. Future basic science investigation may be necessary to determine histologic differences between tenosynovium proximal and distal to the leading edge of the TCL. When surgeons plan a biopsy during surgical release of the carpal tunnel, an open approach may be advantageous. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.

Is Social Media Here to Stay?: Survey Results Indicate Increasing Pathologist Interest and Engagement Over Time.

CONTEXT.­: Social media has become widely adopted by pathologists and other physicians for professional purposes. While engagement has likely increased over time, there remain few concrete data regarding attitudes toward its use. OBJECTIVE.­: To assess pathologists' use of and attitudes toward social media over time. DESIGN.­: We created a survey regarding personal and professional use of social media and circulated it via multiple channels in December 2017 and again in February 2022. Results of the 2 surveys were compared for statistically significant differences. RESULTS.­: The 2017 survey was completed by 97 participants, and the 2022 survey by 305 participants. Respondents were predominantly female and academics, included pathologists in all age categories and all time-in-practice length. In both surveys, Twitter (now X) was the most popular platform for professional use and Facebook was the most popular for personal use. Professional barriers to social media use remained consistent between the 2 surveys, including the amount of time required. Education was seen as the main benefit of social media use in both surveys, while other benefits such as networking and increasing professional visibility were endorsed significantly less often in the second survey. While the second survey received more than 3 times as many responses as the first, several aspects of social media use (mainly demographics) remained similar during the timeframe, while other aspects (such as usage and perceived values) decreased. CONCLUSIONS.­: Pathologists continue to find social media valuable. Barriers remain, though overall pathologists of all ages and practice settings appear receptive to using social media to further educational and other opportunities.