Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Accuracy of the number and location of pathological lymph nodes (LNs) in the pathology report of a neck dissection (ND) is of vital importance.

Objectives: To quantify the error rate in reporting the location and number of pathologic LNs in ND specimens.

Methods: All patients who had undergone a formal ND that included at least neck level 1 for a clinical N1 disease between January 2010 and December 2017 were included in the study. The error rate of the pathology reports was determined by various means: comparing preoperative imaging and pathological report, reporting a disproportionate LN distribution between the different neck levels, and determining an erroneous location of the submandibular gland (SMG) in the pathology report. Since the SMG must be anatomically located in neck level 1, any mistake in reporting it was considered a categorical error.

Results: A total of 227 NDs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The study included 128 patients who had undergone a dissection at levels 1–3, 68 at levels 1–4, and 31 at levels 1–5. The best Kappa score for correlation between preoperative imaging and final pathology was 0.50. There were nine cases (3.9%) of a disproportionate LN distribution in the various levels. The SMG was inaccurately reported outside neck level 1 in 17 cases (7.5%).

Conclusions: At least 7.5% of ND reports were inaccurate in this investigation. The treating physician should be alert to red flags in the pathological report

Background: The Israel National Cancer Registry (INCR) was established in 1960. Reporting has been mandatory since 1982. All neoplasms of uncertain/unknown behavior, in situ and invasive malignancies (excluding basal and squamous cell carcinomas of the skin), and benign neoplasms of the brain and central nervous system (CNS) are reportable.

Objectives: To assess completeness and timeliness of the INCR for cases diagnosed or treated in 2005.

Methods: Abstractors identified cases of in situ and invasive malignancies and tumors of benign and uncertain behavior of the brain and CNS diagnosed or treated in 2005 in the files of medical records departments, pathology and cytology laboratories, and oncology and hematology institutes in 39 Israeli medical facilities. Cases were linked to the INCR database by national identity number. Duplicate cases, and those found to be non-reportable were excluded from analysis. Completeness was calculated as the percent of reportable cases identified by the survey that were present in the registry. Timeliness was calculated as the percent of reportable cases diagnosed in 2005, which were incorporated into the registry prior to 31 December 2007.

Results: The INCR’s completeness is estimated at 93.7% for all reportable diseases, 96.8% for invasive solid tumors, and 88.0% for hematopoietic tumors. Incident cases for the calendar year 2005 were less likely to be present in the registry database than those diagnosed prior to 2005.

Conclusions: Completeness and timeliness of the INCR are high and meet international guidelines. Fully automated reporting will likely improve the quality and timeliness of INCR data.

Background: The sonographic assessment of estimated fetal weight (EFW) is essential for identification of fetuses in weight extremes and aids in peripartum management. However, there are inconsistent reports regarding EFW accuracy.

Objective: To examine maternal and fetal determinants associated with unreliable EFW.

Methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted at a single, tertiary medical center between 2011 and 2019. All term, singleton deliveries with a sonographic EFW within 2 weeks of delivery were included. Unreliable EFW was defined as > 500 grams discordance between it and the actual birth weight. We allocated the study cohort into two groups: unreliable EFW (cases) and accurate EFW (controls).

Results: Overall, 41,261 deliveries met inclusion criteria. Of these, 1721 (4.17%) had unreliable EFW. The factors positively associated with unreliable EFW included body mass index > 30 kg/m², weight gain > 20 kg, higher amniotic fluid index, pregestational diabetes, gestational age > 41^0/7, and birth weight ≥ 4000 grams. On multiple regression analysis, pregestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 2.22, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.56–3.17, P < 0.001) and a higher birth weight (OR 1.91, 95%CI 1.79–2.04, P < 0.001) were independently associated with unreliable EFW. On analysis of different weight categories, pregestational diabetes was associated with unreliable EFW only among birth weights ≥ 3500 grams (OR 3.28, 95%CI 1.98–5.44, P< 0.001) and ≥ 4000 grams (OR 4.27, 95%CI 2.31–7.90, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Pregestational diabetes and increased birth weight are independent risk factors for unreliable EFW and should be considered when planning delivery management.

Background: Sonographic estimation of birth weight may differ among evaluators due to its operator-dependent nature.

Objectives: To compare the accuracy of estimation of fetal birth weight by sonography between ultrasound-certified physicians and registered diagnostic medical technicians.

Methods: The authors reviewed ultrasound examinations that had been performed by either technicians or ultrasound-certified obstetricians between 2010 and 2017, and within 2 days of delivery. Inclusion criteria were: singleton viable pregnancy, details of four ultrasound measurements (abdominal circumference, bi-parietal diameter, head circumference, and femur length), and known birth weight. The estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated according to the Hadlock formula, incorporating the four ultrasound measurements. The mean percentage error (MPE) was calculated by the formula: (EFW-birth weight) x100 / birth weight.

Results: Technicians performed 9741examinations and physicians performed 352 examinations. The proportion of macrosomic neonates was similar in both groups. Technicians were more accurate than physicians in terms of the MPE, absolute MPE, proportion of estimates that fell within ± 10% of birth weight, and Euclidean distance (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). They were also more accurate in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating curve. Furthermore, for fetuses weighing more than 4000 grams the technicians had a lower total false prediction rate.

Conclusions: Medical technicians in our institute performed better than physicians in estimating fetal weight. Further studies are warranted to confirm our findings and better delineate the role of repeat physician’s examination after an initial estimation by an experienced technician.

Background: The primary diagnosis of functional dyspepsia (FD) is made on the basis of typical symptoms and by excluding organic gastrointestinal diseases that cause dyspeptic symptoms. However, there is difficulty reaching a diagnosis in FD.

Objectives: To assess the efficiency of the Usefulness Index (UI) test and history-taking in diagnosing FD.

Methods: A study on acute abdominal pain conducted by the World Organizati­on of Gast­roentero­logy Research Committee (OMGE) included 1333 patients presenting with acute abdo­minal pain. The clinical history-taking variables (n=23) for each pa­tient were recorded in detail using a prede­fined structured data collection sheet, and the collected data were compared with the final diagnoses.

Results: The most signifi­cant clinical history-taking variables of FD in univa­riate analysis were risk ratio (RR): location of pain at diagnosis (RR = 5.7), location of initial pain (RR = 6.5), previous similar pain (RR = 4.0), duration of pain (RR = 2.9), previous abdominal surgery (RR = 4.1), previous abdominal diseases (RR = 4.0), and previous indigestion (RR = 3.1). T­he sensi­tivity of the physicians’ initial de­cisi­on in detecting FD was 0.44, speci­fi­city 0.99 and effi­ciency 0.98; UI was 0.19 and RR 195.3. In the stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of FD were the physicians’ initial decision (RR = 266.4), location of initial pain (RR = 3.4), duration of pain (RR = 3.1), previous abdominal surgery (RR = 3.7), previous indigestion (RR = 2.2) and vomiting (RR = 2.0).

Conclusions: The patients with upper abdominal pain initially and a previous history of abdominal surgery and indigestion tended to be at risk for FD. In these patients the UI test could help the clinician differentiate FD from other diagnoses of acute abdominal pain.

Background: The role of endoscopic ultrasound in evaluating the response of esophageal cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is controversial.

Objectives: To evaluate the accuracy of EUS[1] in restaging patients who underwent NAC[2].

Methods: The disease stage of patients with esophageal cancer was established by means of the TNM classification system. The initial staging was determined by chest and abdominal computed tomography and EUS. Patients who needed NAC underwent a preoperative regimen consisting of cisplatin and fluouracil. Upon completion of the chemotherapy, patients were restaged and then underwent esophagectomy. The results of the EUS staging were compared with the results of the surgical pathology staging. This comparison was done in two groups of patients: the study group (all patients who received NAC) and the control group (all patients who underwent primary esophagectomy without NAC).

Results: NAC was conducted in 20 patients with initial stage IIB and III carcinoma of the esophagus (study group). Post-chemotherapy EUS accurately predicted the surgical pathology stage in 6 patients (30%). Pathological down-staging was noted in 8 patients (40%). However, the EUS was able to observe it in only 2 patients (25%). The accuracy of EUS in determining the T status alone was 80%. The accuracy for N status alone was 35%. In 65% of examinations the EUS either overestimated (35%) or underestimated (30%) the N status. Thirteen patients with initial stage I-IIA underwent primary esophagectomy after the initial staging (control group). EUS accurately predicted the surgical pathology disease stage in 11 patients (85%).

Conclusions: EUS is an accurate modality for initial staging of esophageal carcinoma. However, it is not a reliable tool for restaging esophageal cancer after NAC and it cannot predict response to chemotherapy.

Objectives: To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of FNAB[1] in cases of a solitary thyroid nodule.

Methods: The preoperative FNAB results of 170 patients who underwent thyroidectomy due to a solitary thyroid nodule were compared retrospectively with the final postoperative pathologic diagnoses.

Results: In cases of a solitary thyroid nodule, FNAB had a sensitivity of 79%, specificity of 98.5%, accuracy of 87%, and positive and negative predictive values of 98.75% and 76.6% respectively. All cases of papillary carcinoma diagnosed by FNAB proved to be malignant on final histology, while 8 of 27 cases of follicular adenoma detected by preoperative FNAB were shown to be malignant on final evaluation of the surgical specimen.

Conclusions: FNAB cytology reduces the incidence of thyroidectomy since this method has excellent specificity and sensitivity and a low rate of false-negative results. It proved to be cost-effective and is recommended as the first tool in the diagnostic workup in patients with thyroid nodules.