Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of hysteroscopic tissue removal systems (TRS) on histopathology tissue diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS AND METHODS: This is a paired-comparison ex vivo study in which 23 endometrial sections from hysterectomized uteri (13 benign and 10 hyperplasia/cancer) were analyzed in a simulation laboratory center at a university teaching hospital. After routine tissue processing, a section of endometrium was provided for ex vivo TRS with suture mounting to a uterine model (Polly, Remedy). Morcellated specimens using the Hologic(®) MyoSure hysteroscopic device were processed for histopathologic analysis by two blinded pathologists (Pa and Pb) and compared to the original specimens' tissue diagnoses. RESULTS: Sufficient tissue for evaluation was found in 100% (23/23) of TRS specimens by Pa and 91.3% by Pb. TRS specimen diagnoses were concordant with routine histologic diagnosis 86.9% (20/23, k = 0.76) for Pa and 80.9% (17/21, k = 0.68) for Pb. Sensitivity and specificity were 70%/100% for Pa and 80%/91% for Pb, respectively. The false-positive (overdiagnosed) and false-negative rates (underdiagnosed) were 0%/30% and 9%/20% for Pa and Pb. Both Pa and Pb underdiagnosed most specimens confirmed by routine tissue diagnosis. TRS specimen diagnoses between Pa and Pb were concordant in 76.2% (16/21, k = 0.60). CONCLUSION: TRS may adversely impact the ability to provide a histologic tissue analysis. Up to 30% of samples were overdiagnosed and 20% underdiagnosed. If confirmed, pathologists may need to reassess workflows to better offset potential underdiagnosis of malignant specimens as findings may be obscured through TRS. Additionally, surgeons may need to reconsider specimen handling, so highest yield specimens are provided to pathology.