Skip to main content
Log in

Frozen-Permanent Section Discrepancy Rate in Oral Cavity and Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Head and Neck Pathology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Frozen section evaluation of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is critical for margin status and subsequent patient therapy. In this study, we retrospectively reviewed the rate of frozen-permanent section discrepancies in blocks with two frozen section levels compared to ≥ three levels in oral cavity and oropharyngeal SCCs. A search of the cases with both intraoperative frozen sections and corresponding permanent sections for SCCs in the oral cavity and oropharynx was performed. Frozen sections and permanent slides were compared. The nature of discrepancies was assigned to one of the following: change in diagnosis, margin status, or distance of the tumor from the margin. The cause of the discrepancy was designated as one of the following: block sampling, gross sampling, interpretation, or technical error. The pathologist experience, frozen section technical experience, and intraoperative impact of each discrepancy were also evaluated. A total of 654 frozen and corresponding permanent blocks were assessed. For 532 of the frozen section blocks, two levels were cut, while 122 frozen section blocks had ≥ three levels. Thirty-five frozen-permanent section discrepancies were observed (5.4% of all blocks). Among these, 2.5% had a possible or definitive intraoperative impact. The percentage of discrepancies in the ≥ three levels group (5.7%) was slightly higher than the two-level group (5.3%), and this difference was not statistically significant. For the two-level group, the overall block sampling error rate was 4.5%. This was not significantly different from the 4.1% block sampling error rate seen in the ≥ three levels group. The rate of block sampling discrepancy did not show significant differences based on attending or frozen section technical experience. A change in margin distance (closer margin detected on permanent) occurred in 4% of the blocks and involved 16% of the patients. This review of oral cavity and oropharynx SCCs frozen/permanent section discrepancies shows that the error rate is not significantly different depending on the number of levels cut. The results suggest that always performing more than two frozen section levels may not yield a decreased discrepancy rate. A change in margin distance occurred quite frequently, but only in rare cases it had a definitive impact on the intraoperative management. Given the importance of correct intraoperative diagnosis in patient management, additional levels may be warranted depending on the clinical scenario.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Not applicable.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. El-Naggar AK, Chan JK, Grandis JR, et al. WHO classification of head and neck tumours. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Du E, Ow TJ, Lo Y, Gersten A, et al. Refining the utility and role of frozen section in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma resection. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(8):1768–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baddour HM Jr, Magliocca KR, Chen AY. The importance of margins in head and neck cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113(3):248–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Black C, Marotti J, Zarovnaya E, et al. Critical evaluation of frozen section margins in head and neck cancer resections. Cancer. 2006;107:2792–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Maxwell JH, Thompson LD, Brandwein-Gensler MS, et al. Early oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma: sampling of margins from tumor bed and worse local control. JAMA Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2015;141(12):1104–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chiosea SI. Intraoperative margin assessment in early oral squamous cell carcinoma. Surg Pathol Clin. 2017;10(1):1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prabhu AV, Sturgis CD, Lai C, et al. Improving margin revision: characterization of tumor bed margins in early oral tongue cancer. Oral Oncol. 2017;75:184–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kubik MW, Sridharan S, Varvares MA, et al. Intraoperative margin assessment in head and neck cancer: a case of misuse and abuse? Head Neck Pathol. 2020;14(2):291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC cancer staging manual. 8th ed. New York: Springer; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lester SC. Diagnostic pathology: intraoperative consultation. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  11. DiNardo LJ, Lin J, Karageorge LS, et al. Accuracy, utility, and cost of frozen section margins in head and neck cancer surgery. Laryngoscope. 2000;110:1773–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Remsen KA, Lucente FE, Biller HF. Reliability of frozen section diagnosis in head and neck neoplasms. Laryngoscope. 1984;94(4):519–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ikemura K, Ohya R. The accuracy and usefulness of frozen-section diagnosis. Head Neck. 1990;12(4):298–302.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gandour-Edwards RF, Donald PJ, Wiese DA. Accuracy of intraoperative frozen section diagnosis in head and neck surgery: experience at a university medical center. Head Neck. 1993;15(1):33–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ord RA, Aisner S. Accuracy of frozen sections in assessing margins in oral cancer resection. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;55:663–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Olson SM, Hussaini M, Lewis JS. Frozen section analysis of margins for head and neck tumor resections: reduction of sampling errors with a third histologic level. Mod Pathol. 2011;24(5):665–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Adhikari P, Upadhyaya P, Karki S, et al. Accuracy of frozen section with histopathological report in an institute. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc. 2018;56(210):572–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Layfield EM, Schmidt RL, Esebua M, et al. Frozen section evaluation of margin status in primary squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck: a correlation study of frozen section and final diagnoses. Head Neck Pathol. 2018;12(2):175–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mahe E, Ara S, Bishara M, et al. Intraoperative pathology consultation: error, cause and impact. Can J Surg. 2013;56(3):E13–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funds, grants, or other support was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Serenella Serinelli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest/competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethical Approval

Approval was obtained from the IRB of SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY.

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Serinelli, S., Bryant, S.M., Williams, M.P.A. et al. Frozen-Permanent Section Discrepancy Rate in Oral Cavity and Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Head and Neck Pathol 16, 466–475 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12105-021-01385-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12105-021-01385-7

Keywords

Navigation