Variability of grade and stage in simultaneous paired liver biopsies in patients with hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Grading and staging of liver biopsies in patients with chronic hepatitis remains an inexact "gold standard" that is influenced by variabilities in scoring systems, sampling, observer agreement and expertise. Spatial disease variability relative to markers of the adequacy of biopsy has not been studied previously. METHODS: Paired liver biopsy specimens were obtained from the right and left hepatic lobes of 60 patients with chronic hepatitis C. Histological grade and disease stage were assessed according to the Ludwig scoring system, and scores were evaluated in relation to differences in size and number of portal tracts in all paired samples. RESULTS: The relative difference (%) in aggregate biopsy size and number of portal tracts was similar between paired samples with and without a difference in grade. Paired samples with a difference in stage showed a larger relative difference in biopsy size (p = 0.09) and in the number of portal tracts (p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows a difference of one grade or one stage in 30% of paired liver biopsies, due to a combination of sampling variability and observer variability. Acknowledgment of "built-in" variability in grading and staging chronic hepatitis C by both clinicians and pathologists is essential for managing the individual patient with chronic hepatitis C.

Initial margin status for invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast and subsequent identification of carcinoma in reexcision specimens.

CONTEXT: Margin status of lumpectomy specimens is related to frequency of local recurrence. Optimal surgical technique requires microscopic margins free of carcinoma by at least 2 mm. Recurrence following lumpectomy is associated with residual carcinoma secondary to inadequate resection. OBJECTIVE: To review our series of breast excisions to determine the frequency of residual carcinoma for positive, close, and negative margins. DESIGN: We reviewed lumpectomies and excisional biopsies for invasive ductal carcinoma that had subsequent reexcisions. Margin status of specimens was recorded as positive, less than 1 mm, 1 to 2 mm, or greater than 2 mm. RESULTS: A total of 123 lumpectomies and excisional biopsies of invasive ductal carcinoma with reexcision were reviewed. Residual invasive carcinoma was found in 44% (17), 25% (6), 28% (8), and 16% (5) of cases with positive, less than 1 mm, 1 to 2 mm, and greater than 2 mm margins, respectively. Residual invasive carcinomas were found in 57% (8), 100% (5), 67% (2), and 100% (2) of mastectomies with positive, less than 1 mm, 1 to 2 mm, and greater than 2 mm margins, respectively, in the initial lumpectomy or excisional biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of residual invasive carcinoma was related to margin status of the original lumpectomy/biopsy. Even when margins were positive, most reexcisions were free of carcinoma. Residual invasive carcinoma was found in greater than 25% of patients with margins less than 2 mm, supporting reexcision for patients with margins of less than 2 mm. Sixteen percent of cases with margins greater than 2 mm harbored residual invasive carcinoma. Evaluation of margin status was complicated by tissue distortion and fragmentation.