Abstract
Specimen cut-up forms an important part of the diagnostic process in the histopathological assessment of gynecological pathology specimens. While in small biopsy specimens there may be less diagnostic information that can be gained from macroscopic examination, in larger specimens, in particular, resection specimens, the macroscopic assessment is highly pertinent both diagnostically and as part of the information required to adequately and correctly stage the cancer. Unlike the microscopic examination, which will have the glass slides and paraffin-embedded tissue stored as part of the diagnostic record, specimens are generally disposed after a period of time following cut-up. This will vary in individual laboratories depending on the availability of storage space, but on average, the “wet” specimen is expected to be retained for at least 6 weeks following cut-up. It is important that if the case is considered to be unusual and may require the pathologist to return to it, at this stage, the specimen container should be marked with a “please keep/do not throw out” sticker. The macroscopic report with any photographs may be the only record that is kept of a specimen’s macroscopic features. With this in mind, it is very important to perform a good macroscopic assessment and cut-up of specimens.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Wilkinson N, McCluggage G. Standards and datasets for reporting cancers. Datasets for the histopathological reporting of neoplasms of the ovaries and fallopian tubes and primary carcinomas of the peritoneum. 3rd ed. London: The Royal College of Pathologists; 2010.
McCluggage WG. My approach to and thoughts on the typing of ovarian carcinomas. J Clin Pathol. 2008;61(2):152–63.
Brown L, Andrew A, Hirschowitz L, Millan D. Tissue pathways for gynaecological pathology. Version 1. London: The Royal College of Pathologists; 2008.
Robboy SJ, Mutter GL, Shako-Levy R, Bean SM, Prat J, Bentley RC, Russell P. Cutup – gross description and processing of specimens. In: Robboy SJ, Mutter GL, Prat J, Bentley RC, Russell P, Anderson MC, editors. Robboy’s pathology of the female reproductive tract. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier; 2009.
Ronnett BM, Kajdacsy-Balla A, Gilks CB, Merino MJ, Silva E, Werness BA, Young RH. Mucinous borderline ovarian tumors: points of general agreement and persistent controversies regarding nomenclature, diagnostic criteria and behaviour. Hum Pathol. 2004;35(8):949–60.
Medeiros F, Muto MG, Lee Y, Elvin JA, Callahan MJ, Feltmate C, Garber JE, Cramer DW, Crum CP. The tubal fimbria is a preferred site for early adenocarcinoma in women with familial ovarian cancer syndrome. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30(2):230–6.
Kindelberger DW, Lee Y, Miron A, Hirsch MS, Feltmate C, Medeiros F, Callahan MJ, Garner EO, Gordon RW, Birch C, Berkowitz RS, Muto MG, Crum CP. Intraepithelial carcinoma of the fimbria and pelvic serous carcinoma: evidence for a causal relationship. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(2):161–9.
Lee Y, Medeiros F, Kindelberger D, Callahan MJ, Muto MG, Crum CP. Advances in the recognition of tubal intraepithelial carcinoma: applications to cancer screening and the pathogenesis of ovarian cancer. Adv Anat Pathol. 2006;13(1):1–7.
Usubutun A, Ozseker HS, Himmetoglu C, Balci S, Ayhan A. Omentectomy for gynecologic cancer: how much sampling is adequate for microscopic examination? Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131(10):1578–81.
Doig T, Monaghan H. Sampling the omentum in ovarian neoplasia: when one block is enough. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16(1):36–40.
Movahedi-Lankarani S, Baker PM, Gilks B, Soslow RA, Otis CN, Oliva E. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinoma of the ovary. Northfield, Illinois, USA: College of American Pathologists; 2012.
Misdraji J. Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms. Controversial issues. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:864–70.
McCluggage WG, Lyness RW, Atkinson RJ, Dobbs SP, Harley I, McClelland HR, Price JH. Morphological effects of chemotherapy on ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55(1):27–31.
Miller K, Price JH, Dobbs SP, McClelland RH, Kennedy K, McCluggage WG. An immunohistochemical and morphological analysis of post-chemotherapy ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Pathol. 2008;61(5):652–7.
Chew I, Soslow RA, Park KJ. Morphologic changes in ovarian carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: report of a case showing extensive clear cell changes mimicking clear cell carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2009;28(5):442–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wright, P.K., McVey, R.J., Wilkinson, N. (2014). Specimen Cut-Up. In: Wilkinson, N. (eds) Pathology of the Ovary, Fallopian Tube and Peritoneum. Essentials of Diagnostic Gynecological Pathology. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2942-4_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2942-4_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2941-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2942-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)