Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 289, Issue 6, pp 1165–1170

Frozen section in gynaecology: uses and limitations

Review

Abstract

Purpose

Frozen sections are a valuable resource when utilised properly. This review aims to raise awareness of the strengths and limitations of its use in gynaecological surgery.

Methods

This is a review of literature combined with experience and survey of the practice in the United Kingdom.

Conclusion

Frozen sections are a valuable adjunct to diagnosis and management in gynaecological surgery, when requested appropriately, handled by a pathologist who is aware of the clinicopathologic setting and accepted by a surgeon who is acquainted with the limitations of the procedure.

Keywords

Neoplasm Diagnosis Intra-operative Frozen section 

References

  1. 1.
    Acs G (2002) Intraoperative consultation in gynecologic pathology. Semin Diagn Pathol 19(4):237–254PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Scurry JP, Sumithran E (1989) An assessment of the value of frozen sections in gynecological surgery. Pathology 21(3):159–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jacyna LS (1988) The laboratory and the clinic: the impact of pathology on surgical diagnosis in the Glasgow Western Infirmary, 1875–1910. Bull Hist Med 62:384–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wright JR Jr (1985) The development of the frozen section technique, the evolution of surgical biopsy, and the origins of surgical pathology. Bull Hist Med 59:295–326PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilson LB (1905) A method for the rapid preparation of fresh tissues for the microscope. JAMA 45:1737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gal AA (2005) The centennial anniversary of the frozen section technique at the Mayo Clinic. Arch Pathol Lab Med 129(12):1532–1535PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Acs G, Baloch ZW, LiVolsi VA (2002) Intraoperative consultation: an historical perspective. Semin Diagn Pathol 19(4):190–191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Iinuma H, Tamura J, Omoto D, Kamo N, Ohnaka S, Mitoma Y, Miyazawa Y, Okinaga K, Imamura T, Fukushima R, Watanabe T, Ikeda T (2012) Accurate and rapid novel genetic diagnosis for detection of sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 107(4):724–731PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferris RL, Stefanika P, Xi L, Gooding W, Seethala RR, Godfrey TE (2012) Rapid molecular detection of metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma as an intraoperative adjunct to sentinel lymph node biopsy. Laryngoscope 122(5):1020–1030PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coffey D, Kaplan AL, Ramzy I (2005) Intraoperative consultation in gynaecologic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 129(12):1544–1557PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baker P, Oliva E (2008) A practical approach to intraoperative consultation in gynecological pathology. Int J Gynecol Pathol 27(3):353–365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ilvan S, Ramazanoglu R, Ulker Akyildiz E, Calay Z, Bese T, Oruc N (2005) The accuracy of frozen section (intraoperative consultation) in the diagnosis of ovarian masses. Gynecol Oncol 97(2):395–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boriboonhirunsarn D, Sermboon A (2004) Accuracy of frozen section in the diagnosis of malignant ovarian tumor. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 30(5):394–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brun JL, Cortez A, Rouzier R, Callard P, Bazot M, Uzan S, Daraï E (2008) Factors influencing the use and accuracy of frozen section diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(3):244.e1–244.e7Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bige O, Demir A, Saygili U, Gode F, Uslu T, Koyuncuoglu M (2011) Frozen section diagnoses of 578 ovarian tumors made by pathologists with and without expertise on gynecologic pathology. Gynecol Oncol 123(1):43–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stewart CJ, Brennan BA, Hammond IG, Leung YC, McCartney AJ (2005) Accuracy of frozen section in distinguishing primary ovarian neoplasia from tumors metastatic to the ovary. Int J Gynecol Pathol 24(4):356–362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rose PG, Rubin RB, Nelson BE, Hunter RE, Reale FR (1994) Accuracy of frozen-section (intraoperative consultation) diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 171(3):823–826PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Coumbos A, Sehouli J, Chekerov R, Schaedel D, Oskay-Oezcelik G, Lichtenegger W, Kuehn W (2009) North-Eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology (NOGGO). Clinical management of borderline tumours of the ovary: results of a multicentre survey of 323 clinics in Germany. Br J Cancer 100(11):1731–1738PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cross PA, Naik R, Patel A, Nayar AG, Hemming JD, Williamson SL, Henry JA, Edmondson RJ, Godfrey KA, Galaal K, Kucukmetin A, Lopes AD (2012) Intra-operativefrozen section analysis for suspected early-stage ovarian cancer: 11 years of Gateshead Cancer Centre experience. BJOG 119(2):194–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Medeiros LR, Rosa DD, Edelweiss MI, Stein AT, Bozzetti MC, Zelmanowicz A, Pohlmann PR, Meurer L, Carballo MT (2005) Accuracy of frozen-section analysis in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a systematic quantitative review. Int J Gynecol Cancer 15(2):192–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tempfer CB, Polterauer S, Bentz EK, Reinthaller A, Hefler LA (2007) Accuracy of intraoperative frozen section analysis in borderline tumors of the ovary: a retrospective analysis of 96 cases and review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol 107(2):248–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ganesan R, Brown LJ, Kehoe S, McCluggage WG, El-Bahrawy MA (2013) The role of frozen sections in gynaecological oncology: survey of practice in the United Kingdom. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 166(2):204–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Onsrud M, Kiserud T, Halvorsen T, Nustad K (1996) Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in the pre-operative diagnosis of pelvic masses. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 103(8):826–831PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Håkansson F, Høgdall EV, Nedergaard L, Lundvall L, Engelholm SA, Pedersen AT, Hartwell D, Høgdall C (2012) Danish ‘pelvic mass’ ovarian cancer study. Risk of malignancy index used as a diagnostic tool in a tertiary centre for patients with a pelvic mass. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 91(4):496–502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Valentin L, McIndoe A, Ghaem-Maghami S, Testa AC, Vergote I, Bourne T (2012) Triaging women with ovarian masses for surgery: observational diagnostic study to compare RCOG guidelines with an International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group protocol. BJOG 119(6):662–671PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Timmerman D, Ameye L, Fischerova D, Epstein E, Melis GB, Guerriero S, Van Holsbeke C, Savelli L, Fruscio R, Lissoni AA, Testa AC, Veldman J, Vergote I, Van Huffel S, Bourne T, Valentin L (2010) Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group. BMJ 341:c6839PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bast RC Jr, Badgwell D, Lu Z, Marquez R, Rosen D, Liu J, Baggerly KA, Atkinson EN, Skates S, Zhang Z, Lokshin A, Menon U, Jacobs I, Lu K (2005) New tumor markers:CA125 and beyond. Int J Gynecol Cancer 15(Suppl 3):274–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lin J, Qin J, Sangvatanakul V (2013) Human epididymis protein 4 for differential diagnosis between benign gynecologic disease and ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 167(1):81–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Valentin L, Ameye L, Savelli L, Fruscio R, Leone FP, Czekierdowski A, Lissoni AA, Fischerova D, Guerriero S, Van Holsbeke C, Van Huffel S, Timmerman D (2011) Adnexal masses difficult to classify as benign or malignant using subjective assessment of gray-scale and doppler ultrasound findings: logistic regression models do not help. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38(4):456–465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yarandi F, Eftekhar Z, Izadi-Mood N, Shojaei H (2008) Accuracy of intraoperative frozen section in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 48(4):438–441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xu HT, Liu Y, Liu SL, Miao Y, Li QC, Wang EH (2013) TC-1 (C8orf4) expression is correlated with differentiation in ovarian carcinomas and might distinguish metastatic ovarian from metastatic colorectal carcinomas. Virchows Arch 462(3):281–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Seidman JD, Kurman RJ, Ronnett BM (2003) Primary and metastatic mucinous adenocarcinomas in the ovaries: incidence in routine practice with a new approach to improve intraoperative diagnosis. Am J Surg Pathol 27(7):985–993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lewis MR, Deavers MT, Silva EG, Malpica A (2006) Ovarian involvement by metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma: still a diagnostic challenge. Am J Surg Pathol 30(2):177–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Provenza C, Young RH, Prat J (2008) Anaplastic carcinoma in mucinous ovarian tumors:a clinicopathologic study of 34 cases emphasizing the crucial impact of stage on prognosis, their histologic spectrum, and overlap with sarcomalike mural nodules. Am J Surg Pathol 32(3):383–389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Storms AA, Sukumvanich P, Monaco SE, Beriwal S, Krivak TC, Olawaiye AB, Kanbour-Shakir A (2012) Mucinous tumors of the ovary: diagnostic challenges at frozen section and clinical implications. Gynecol Oncol 125(1):75–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pongsuvareeyakul T, Khunamornpong S, Settakorn J, Sukpan K, Suprasert P, Siriaunkgul S (2012) Accuracy of frozen-section diagnosis of ovarian mucinous tumors. Int J Gynecol Cancer 22(3):400–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stewart CJ, Brennan BA, Hammond IG, Leung YC, McCartney AJ (2006) Intraoperative assessment of ovarian tumors: a 5-year review with assessment of discrepant diagnostic cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol 25(3):216–222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lim FK, Yeoh CL, Chong SM, Arulkumaran S (1997) Pre and intraoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours: how accurate are we? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 37(2):223–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kokka F, Singh N, Reynolds K, Oram D, Jeyarajah A, Hassan L, Akintunde AH, Hamzawala I, Okojie G, Faruqi A (2009) The accuracy of frozen section diagnosis in apparent early ovarian cancer–results from a UK centre. Histopathology 55(6):756–758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Offman SL, Longacre TA (2012) Clear cell carcinoma of the female genital tract (not everything is as clear as it seems). Adv Anat Pathol 19(5):296–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wu DC, Hirschowitz S, Natarajan S (2005) Ectopic decidua of pelvic lymph nodes: a potential diagnostic pitfall. Arch Pathol Lab Med 129(5):e117–e120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bjornsson BL, Nelson BE, Reale FR, Rose PG (1993) Accuracy of frozen section for lymph node metastasis in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 51(1):50–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Neiger R, Bailey SA, Wall AM 3rd, Jennings JB, Gallup DG (1991) Evaluating cervical cone biopsy specimens with frozen sections at hysterectomy. J Reprod Med 36(2):103–107PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Behtash N, Karimi Zarchi M, Hamedi B, Azmoode Ardalan F, Tehranian A (2007) The value of frozen sectioning for the evaluation of resection margins in cases of conization. Arch Gynecol Obstet 276(5):529–532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Park KJ, Soslow RA, Sonoda Y, Barakat RR, Abu-Rustum NR (2008) Frozen-section evaluation of cervical adenocarcinoma at time of radical trachelectomy:pathologic pitfalls and the application of an objective scoring system. Gynecol Oncol 110(3):316–323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Spandorfer SD, Menzin AW, Barnhart KT, LiVolsi VA, Pfeifer SM (1996) Efficacy of frozen-section evaluation of uterine curettings in the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175(3 Pt 1):603–605PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Heller DS, Hessami S, Cracchiolo B, Skurnick JH (2000) Reliability of frozen section of uterine curettings in evaluation of possible ectopic pregnancy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 7(4):519–522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Quinlivan JA, Petersen RW, Nicklin JL (2001) Accuracy of frozen section for the operative management of endometrial cancer. BJOG 108(8):798–803PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Fanning J, Tsukada Y, Piver MS (1990) Intraoperative frozen section diagnosis of depth of myometrial invasion in endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 37(1):47–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Roy S, Saroha V, Jain D (2010) Highly cellular leiomyoma mimics a malignant small round-cell tumor: a diagnostic dilemma on frozen sections. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 49(2):203–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Horn LC, Wagner S (2010) Frozen section analysis of vulvectomy specimens: results of a 5-year study period. Int J Gynecol Pathol 29(2):165–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Stacy D, Burrell MO, Franklin EW 3rd (1986) Extramammary Paget’s disease of the vulva and anus: use of intraoperative frozen-section margins. Am J Obstet Gynecol 155(3):519–523PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HistopathologyCentre for Pathology, Imperial College–Hammersmith HospitalLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Cellular Pathology, 1st Floor LabsBirmingham Women’s HospitalBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations