E-ISSN: 2619-9467

Contents    Publication Date: 22 Jun 2022
Year 2022 - Volume 32 - Issue 2

Open Access

Peer Reviewed

96 Viewed92 Downloaded

Correlation Between Frozen Section and Definitive Diagnosis in High-Risk Endometrial Carcinoma: Retrospective Analysis

Full Text PDF  
JCOG. 2022;32(2):39-45
DOI: 10.5336/jcog.2021-85756
Article Language: EN
Copyright Ⓒ 2020 by Türkiye Klinikleri. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the correlation of intraoperative and definitive diagnosis in high-risk endometrial carcinomas, and percentages of compliance or non-compliance of intraoperative examination in high-risk endometrial carcinoma cases. Material and Methods: In this retrospective study, the pathology archives of our center were evaluated and 90 high risk endometrial carcinoma cases that were examined intraoperatively, between 2005-2017 were analyzed. The following criteria were used to identify high-risk endometrial carcinoma cases: Grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas with lymphovascular invasion and/or myometrial invasion of more than half, tumors of stage 2, 3, 4 and non-endometrioid endometrial carcinoma. Results: Histopathological subtyping was accurate in 52 of the 57 cases of endometrioid carcinoma, 3 of the 20 cases of serous carcinoma and 1 of the 4 cases of clear cell carcinoma. None of the patients diagnosed with mixed carcinoma were accurately diagnosed in frozen section. When results of intraoperative and permenant evaluations were compared; 74.4% of the cases were compatible for histopathological subtype, 76.7% for grade, and 77.7% for myometrial invasion. Conclusion: In patients with high-risk endometrial carcinoma without a preoperative diagnosis, intraoperative evaluation is essential for determining prognostic parameters and performing surgical staging intraoperatively. Despite the careful evaluation of pathologists, the error rate is high in intraoperative evaluation of high-risk endometrial carcinomas. In order to minimize the error rate, both gross and microscopical assessment should be performed with utmost care.
  1. Taxy JB, Husain AN, Montag AG. Biopsy Interpretation: The Frozen Section. In: Montag AG, ed. Intraoperative Consultation in Gynecologic Pathology. 2nd ed. Phildelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010. p.33-46.
  2. Coffey DM, Ramzy I. Frozen Section Library: Gynecologic Patho- logy Intraoperative Consultation. Uterine Body. 1st ed. New York: Springer; 2012. p.103-52. [Crossref] 
  3. Gitas G, Proppe L, Alkatout I, Rody A, Kotanidis C, Tsolakidis D, et al. Accuracy of frozen section at early clinical stage of endometrioid endometrial cancer: a retrospective analysis in Germany. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;300(1):169-74. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  4. Santoro A, Piermattei A, Inzani F, Angelico G, Valente M, Arciuolo D, et al. Frozen section accurately allows pathological characterization of endometrial cancer in patients with a preoperative ambiguous or inconclusive diagnoses: our experience. BMC Cancer. 2019;19(1):1096. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  5. Di Cello A, Rania E, Zuccalà V, Venturella R, Mocciaro R, Zullo F, et al. Failure to recognize preoperatively high-risk endometrial carcinoma is associated with a poor outcome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;194:153-60. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  6. Gilks CB, Oliva E, Soslow RA. Poor interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of high-grade endometrial carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37(6):874-81. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  7. Murali R, Soslow RA, Weigelt B. Classification of endometrial carcinoma: more than two types. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(7):e268-78. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  8. Altin D, Taşkın S, Kahramanoglu I, Vatansever D, Tokgozoglu N, Karabük E, et al. Combination of sentinel lymph node mapping and uterine frozen section examination to reduce side-specific lymphadenectomy rate in endometrial cancer: a Turkish Gynecologic Oncology Group study (TRSGO-SLN-002). Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(7):1005-11. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  9. Renz M, Diver E, English D, Kidd E, Dorigo O, Karam A. Sentinel lymph node biopsies in endometrial cancer: practice patterns among gynecologic oncologists in the united states. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(2):482-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  10. Malpica A. How to approach the many faces of endometrioid carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2016;29 Suppl 1:S29-44. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  11. Mandato VD, Torricelli F, Mastrofilippo V, Palicelli A, Ciarlini G, Pirillo D, et al. Accuracy of preoperative endometrial biopsy and intraoperative frozen section in predicting the final pathological diagnosis of endometrial cancer. Surg Oncol. 2020;35:229-35. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  12. Şenol T, Polat M, Özkaya E, Karateke A. Misinterpretation of frozen section in endometrial cancer cases: does it have any effect on disease-free and overall survival? Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2017;36(6):550-4. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  13. Visser NCM, Reijnen C, Massuger LFAG, Nagtegaal ID, Bulten J, Pijnenborg JMA. Accuracy of endometrial sampling in endometrial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(4):803-13. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  14. Batista TP, Cavalcanti CL, Tejo AA, Bezerra AL. Accuracy of preoperative endometrial sampling diagnosis for predicting the final pathology grading in uterine endometrioid carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42(9):1367-71. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  15. Karalok A, Ureyen I, Reis Y, Oktay O, Turan T, Boran N, et al. Prediction of staging with preoperative parameters and frozen/section in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of grade 1 endometrioid tumor in endometrial cancer. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2014;15(1):41-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  16. Dane C, Bakir S. The effect of myometrial invasion on prognostic factors and survival analysis in endometrial carcinoma. Afr Health Sci. 2019;19(4):3235-41. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  17. Cirisano FD Jr, Robboy SJ, Dodge RK, Bentley RC, Krigman HR, Synan IS, et al. Epidemiologic and surgicopathologic findings of papillary serous and clear cell endometrial cancers when compared to endometrioid carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;74(3):385-94. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  18. Li Y, Cong P, Wang P, Peng C, Liu M, Sun G. Risk factors for pelvic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;300(4):1007-13. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  19. Stephan JM, Hansen J, Samuelson M, McDonald M, Chin Y, Bender D, et al. Intra-operative frozen section results reliably predict final pathology in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133(3):499-505. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  20. Cetinkaya K, Atalay F, Bacinoglu A. Risk factors of lymph node metastases with endometrial carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(15):6353-6. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  21. AlHilli MM, Podratz KC, Dowdy SC, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Weaver AL, McGree ME, et al. Risk-scoring system for the individualized prediction of lymphatic dissemination in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;131(1):103-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  22. Lucic N, Draganovic D, Sibincic S, Ecim-Zlojutro V, Milicevic S. myometrium invasion, tumour size and lymphovascular invasion as a prognostic factor in dissemination of pelvic lymphatics at endometrial carcinoma. Med Arch. 2017;71(5):325-9. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  23. Wang ZQ, Wang JL, Shen DH, Li XP, Wei LH. Should all endometrioid uterine cancer patients undergo systemic lymphadenectomy? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39(4):344-9. [Crossref]  [PubMed]