Utilizing electronic resources to promote your residency program.

As the COVID-19 pandemic spread to the United States, it was followed by unprecedented changes. These changes did not spare undergraduate and graduate medical students. Specifically, medical students applying for residency programs were faced with a novel challenge. In March 2020, as the pandemic became increasingly severe, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) recommended pulling medical students from in-person clinical rotations. By May 2020, the AAMC recommended that all residency interviews be conducted online for the 2020-2021 residency application cycle. These unprecedented modifications to the interview season required programs to quickly adapt and find ways to utilize online tools to convey what their program offered to applicants. In this paper, we will outline the adaptations, tools, and resources that residencies and applicants have used to navigate through the 2020/2021 interview cycle.

Practical diagnostic utility of thyroid fine-needle aspiration cell blocks: is always too much?

INTRODUCTION: Thyroid fine-needle aspiration (tFNA) is a powerful screening tool for assessing solitary thyroid nodules. Generally, morphologic evaluation of smears yields an accurate diagnosis; but, in some cases it is useful to have a cell block (CB) to conduct ancillary studies such as immunohistochemistry (IHC). Cytologic diagnoses guide clinical decisions, so it is important that accurate and efficient diagnoses be rendered. Our study evaluates the diagnostic utility of the CB in the evaluation of tFNAs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all tFNA specimens from January 2014 to July 2019. Data collected included TAT (in days), diagnosis, if a CB was prepared, and if it was diagnostically contributory. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Data were analyzed using the χ2 test and the Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Of the 2321 specimens, 40.2% (933) had CB and only 0.3% (7) were diagnostically contributory. IHC was used for 2 cases. For cases with CB, the median TAT was one day [0-18 days] and the median TAT without CB was 0 [0-9 days]. There was a significant difference in TAT between cases with a CB and those without. Most cases without a CB had same-day TAT (66.4%), whereas only 1.1% of those with a CB had same day TAT. Cases with CB were more likely to have a TAT >1 day (65% versus 12.1%) or >3 days (25.4% versus 10%) than those without a CB (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We found the diagnostic utility of CB for tFNAs to be very low. The addition of a CB added at least 1 day to the TAT in all diagnostic strata. The additional time causes patients to wait for results, even for nondiagnostic studies. The increased TAT, resources, and manpower use may be reduced if CB were produced only as needed-if the results of the smear were ambiguous or if ancillary tests were needed to confirm the diagnosis.

Utilizing electronic resources to promote your residency program

As the COVID-19 pandemic spread to the United States, it was followed by unprecedented changes. These changes did not spare undergraduate and graduate medical students. Specifically, medical students applying for residency programs were faced with a novel challenge. In March 2020, as the pandemic became increasingly severe, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) recommended pulling medical students from in-person clinical rotations. By May 2020, the AAMC recommended that all residency interviews be conducted online for the 2020-2021 residency application cycle. These unprecedented modifications to the interview season required programs to quickly adapt and find ways to utilize online tools to convey what their program offered to applicants. In this paper, we will outline the adaptations, tools, and resources that residencies and applicants have used to navigate through the 2020/2021 interview cycle.

Factors affecting the concordance of radiologic and pathologic tumor size in breast carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Radiologic assessment of tumor size is an integral part of the work-up for breast carcinoma. With improved radiologic equipment, surgical decision relies profoundly upon radiologic/clinical stage. We wanted to see the concordance between radiologic and pathologic tumor size to infer how accurate radiologic/clinical staging is. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The surgical pathology and ultrasonography reports of patients with breast carcinoma were reviewed. Data were collected for 406 cases. Concordance was defined as a size difference within ±2 mm. RESULTS: The difference between radiologic and pathologic tumor size was within ±2 mm in 40.4% cases. The mean radiologic size was 1.73 ± 1.06 cm. The mean pathologic size was 1.84 ± 1.24 cm. A paired t-test showed a significant mean difference between radiologic and pathologic measurements (0.12 ± 1.03 cm, p = 0.03). Despite the size difference, stage classification was the same in 59.9% of cases. Radiologic size overestimated stage in 14.5% of cases and underestimated stage in 25.6% of cases. The concordance rate was significantly higher for tumors ≤2 cm (pT1) (51.1%) as compared to those greater than 2 cm (≥pT2) (19.7%) (p < 0.0001). Significantly more lumpectomy specimens (47.5%) had concordance when compared to mastectomy specimens (29.8%) (p < 0.0001). Invasive ductal carcinoma had better concordance compared to other tumors (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Mean pathologic tumor size was significantly different from mean radiologic tumor size. Concordance was in just over 40% of cases and the stage classification was the same in about 60% of cases only. Therefore, surgical decision of lumpectomy versus mastectomy based on radiologic tumor size may not always be accurate.

Tumor Size in Breast Carcinoma: Gross Measurement Is Important!

INTRODUCTION: The staging of breast carcinoma is mainly dependent on tumor size and lymph node status. Small increments in tumor size upstage the patient. An accurate determination of the tumor size is therefore critically important. Although the final staging is based on microscopic size, pathologists rely on gross measurements in a considerable number of cases. METHODS: We investigated the concordance between gross and microscopic measurements of breast carcinoma as well as factors affecting this concordance. This study is a retrospective review of surgical pathology reports of invasive breast carcinomas. Data were collected for 411 cases. Concordance was defined as a size difference within ±2 mm. RESULTS: Gross and microscopic sizes were identical in 33.1% of cases. Gross and microscopic size difference was within ±2 mm in 56% of cases. Despite the size difference, stage classification ended up being the same in 68.6% of cases. Tumor stage was over estimated by gross measurement in 17.0% of cases and underestimated in 14.4% of cases. The concordance was significantly higher for those tumors in which final pathologic tumor (pT) size was greater than 2 cm (≥pT2) as compared with those less than or equal to 2 cm (≤pT1; P < .0001). A higher proportion of mastectomy specimens (61.4%) were concordant as compared with lumpectomy specimens (52.1%). CONCLUSION: Gross and microscopic tumor sizes were concordant in 56% of cases. Stage classification based on gross and microscopic tumor size was different in nearly one third (31.4%) of cases. Gross tumor size is critically important in accurate staging at least in cases where tumor size cannot be confirmed microscopically.

Clinical significance of the diagnosis of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL-H) was not included in the 2001 Bethesda System. It is used in some institutions to diagnose cases that fulfill criteria for both the diagnosis of LSIL and atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H). In this study, the authors reviewed their experience with cases reported as LSIL-H during a 4-year interval. METHODS: Clinical information and histologic follow-up data were retrieved for Papanicolaou (Pap) tests (PTs) that were diagnosed as LSIL-H, LSIL, ASC-H and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2007. RESULTS: Of 235,645 PTs (97% SurePath) that were processed during the study period, the laboratory diagnosed 0.52% as ASC-H, 2% as LSIL, 0.30% as LSIL-H, and 0.39% as HSIL. Biopsy follow-up was available for 47%, 49%, 56.7% and 74% of these cases, respectively. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN-2) and CIN-3 or more severe lesions (CIN-3+) were identified on follow-up cervical biopsy more often in women who had diagnoses of LSIL-H and ASC-H (33.14% and 26.33%, respectively) than in women who had a diagnosis of LSIL (16.11%). CONCLUSIONS: The similarity of histologic follow-up results between LSIL-H and ASC-H suggested that the management of women who have a diagnosis of LSIL-H should be similar to the management of women who have a diagnosis of ASC-H.