A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Rathod, Chandrakanth V.
- Neoplastic Breast Lesions-a Histopathological Study with Special Emphasis on Histological Grading
Authors
1 Dept. of Pathology, Navodaya Medical College and Research Hospital, Raichur, Karnataka-584103, IN
2 Dept. of Pathology, Navodaya Medical College and Research Hospital, Raichur, Karnataka, IN
3 Dept. of Pathology, SSMC, Tumkur, Karnataka, IN
Source
Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, Vol 4, No 1 (2013), Pagination: 58-62Abstract
Background and objectives: Breast neoplasms are the most common tumors affecting the women. This study was undertaken with an overall aim to explore the different aspects of breast tumors as one of the commonest neoplasia in women, particularly the histopathological features with special reference to histological grading.
Materials and methods: A prospective study was done in the department of Pathology, from June 2008 to May 2010. The specimens were collected from patients clinically diagnosed as having masses and histopathologically as tumors. All these lesions were classified according to World Health Organization classification.
Results: Hundred and ten cases were studied and data were analysed. All patients were females. Of the total 110 breast tumors, 62( 56.36% ) cases were benign, One( 00.90% ) ca-in situ, and 47 ( 42.72% ) were malignant. Fibroadenoma was the commonest among benign tumors. Of the malignant lesions studied 38 were infiltrating ductal carcinoma (80.85%), four (08.51%) were malignant phylloides, two (04.25%) were medullary carcinoma, two (04.25%) were lobular carcinoma and one (02.12%) was tubular carcinoma. Majority of malignant tumors were of grade I. ER/PR was positive in 16/22 cases. HER2/ neu was positive in 3/22 cases.
Conclusion: Morphological variants of invasive cancer have different biological outcomes. Distinguishing these heterogeneous forms of breast cancer along with grading is crucial for prognostic prediction. Therefore grading should be included as a component of minimum data set for histological reporting of breast cancer.
Keywords
Breast Neoplasms, Grading, Phyllodes TumorReferences
- Schmitt, SJ. The breast. In : Stenberg’s diagnostic surgical pathology. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2004. 323-95.
- Pai MR, Pai KN, Rao RV, Naik R, Shankaranarayana, Baliga P. Connective tissue stromal changes in tumors and tumors like lesions of the breast. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 1999; 42: 327-332.
- Khanna R, Khanna S, Chaturvedi S, Arya NC. Spectrum of breast disease in young females: A retrospective study of 1315 patients, Indian J Pathol Microbiol 1998; 41: 397-401.
- Hemalatha AL, Vidyakumari M & Rupashree S. Intra-operative imprint cytodiagnosis of breast lesions – A current perspective. Journal of Cytology. 2005; 22: 23-7.
- Bell DA, Hajdu SI, Urban JA, Gaston JP. Role of aspiration cytology in the diagnosis and management of mammary lesions in office practice. Cancer 1983; 51: 1182-89.
- Giuliano AE. Breast. In: Way LW and Doherty GM eds. Current surgical diagnosis and treatment. 11th ed. Boston: Lange. 2003; 319-43.
- Russell RCG, Williams NS and Bulstrode CJK. The breast. In: Bailey and Love’s short practice of surgery. 24th ed. London: Arnold. 2004; 824-46.
- Kuijper A, Mommers EC, Vanderwall E, Van Diest PJ. Histopathology of fibroadenoma of the breast. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001; 115: 736-42.
- Pietruszka M, Barnes L. Cystosarcoma phyllodes: A clinicopathological analysis of 42 cases. Cancer. 1978; 41: 1974-83.
- Azzopardi JG. Problems in breast pathology. WB Saunders Company. 1979; 346-65.
- Rosai J, editor. Breast. In: Rosai and Ackerman’s surgical pathology. 9th ed, St.Louis: Mosby. 2004; 1763-1876.
- Lester SC, Kumar V, Abbas AK and Fausto N. The breast. In: Robbins and Cotron Pathologic basis of disease.7thEdition.Philadelphia, WB Saunder’s Company; 2004: 1119-1154.
- Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Garau XS, Bussolati G, Tavasolli FA and Eusebi V et al. Invasive breast carcinoma. In: World Health Organization classification of tumors, Pathology and Genetics of Tumors of the Breast and Female Genital organs. Lyon, IARC Press. 2002; 13-59.
- Macmohan B, Feinleib M. Breast cancer in relation to nursing and menopausal history. J Natl Cancer Inst 1960; 24: 733-53.
- Chary AY. Malignant breast lump. In: Clinical and operative surgery. 2nd ed. Hyderabad: Paras. 2002; 176-220.
- McDivit RW, Stewart FW, Berg JW. In: Atlas of tumor pathology, Second series, Fascicle 2. Tumors of the breast. Washington DC: AFIP, 1968.
- Pereira H, Pinder SE, Sibbering DM.Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. IV: Should you be a typer or a grader? A comparative study of two histological prognostic features in operable breast carcinoma. Histopathology.1995; 27: 219-26.
- Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma. A reproducibility study. Cancer 1994; 73: 2765-70.
- Frierson HF Jr, Wolber RA, Berean KW, Franquemont DW, Gaffey MJ, Boyd JC, Wilbur DC. Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 103: 195-98.
- Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N, Dawkins H, Harvey J, Sterett G, Ellis I, Elston C. Histological grading of breast carcinomas. A study of interobseryer agreement. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 873-79.
- Elston CW, Ellis IO. Systemic pathology. 3Ed. In: The Breast. CW Elston and IO Ellis Eds. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh.1998.
- Henson DE, Ries L, Freedman LS, Carriage M. Relationship among outcome, stage of disease, and histologic grade for 22,616 cases of breast cancer. The basis foe a prognostic index. Cancer.1991; 68: 2142-9.
- Elston CW & Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: Experience from a large study with long term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991; 19: 403-10.
- A Prospective Study of Role of Fess in Management of Recurrent Nasal Polyposis
Authors
1 Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore, IN
2 Dept. of Pathology, Navodaya Medical College, Raichur, IN
3 Chirag Hospital, Bangalore, IN
Source
Indian Journal of Physiotherapy & Occupational Therapy-An International Journal, Vol 6, No 4 (2012), Pagination: 249-253Abstract
Background and objectives: Nasal Polyps are the most frequent and very prevalent nasal masses, which the otorhinolaryngologists come across. The uncertain etiologies of this condition have contributed greatly to a wide range of treatment, none of which has been uniformly successful or universally accepted. Hence, this literature looks at the various causes of recurrence of nasal polyposis and also compares the efficacy of conventional and endoscopic endonasal polypectomy in terms of safety, recurrence and postoperative morbidity.
Materials and methods: The present study was conducted in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology in Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre from April 2009 to March 2011.
Data for this study was collected. All clinically confirmed cases of recurrent nasal polyposis Cases selected were subjected to a complete examination according to the defined proforma.Detailed history was taken and clinical examination done. Acute infections were treated on medical line and then taken up for surgery. All patients received a course of antibiotics starting one day prior to surgery. The patients were treated either by conventional polypectomy or Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS).The patients were discharged when fit and were strictly called for follow-up on the first week, third week, 2nd month, 4th month, 6th month and 1 year from date of surgery.
Results: Fifty cases having nasal polyposis were selected and subjected to surgical management. The cases were divided into 2 groups. The first 25 cases were identified as Group-1 and were subjected to surgical management using conventional polypectomy. Similarly, the next 25 cases were identified as Group-2 and were subjected to surgical management using Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS).
The salient observations of this study are as follows:
1. Age: The age of the patients ranged from 6-65 years with a mean age of 31.5 years. In case of antrochoanal polyp, the average age was 20 years.
2. Sex: A male preponderance is seen with a male: female ratio of 2.57:1.
3. Complaints: Majority of the patients presented with complaints of nasal obstruction and nasal discharge, followed by headache, sneezing, anosmia and postnasal drip.
4. Diagnosis: Out of 50 cases, 31 patients presented with Ethmoidal polyp and 19 patients presented Antrochoanal polyp.
5. Complications: Bleeding (<50 ml), was the most common intraoperative and postoperative complication.
6. Recurrence: Recurrence was seen in 36% cases with conventional polypectomy and 12% cases with functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS), which indicates low recurrence in case of patients who underwent FESS.
Conclusion: Nasal polyposis is a prevalent disease and is known for its recurrence. Functional ndoscopic sinus surgery is a minimally invasive technique used to restore sinus ventilation and normal function. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery revolutionized the management of chronic inflammatory sinus diseases. In nasal polyposis, there is no doubt that the polypoidal mucosa needs to be completely removed to prevent recurrence. Endoscopic technique can help achieve this goal and also preserve the healthy mucosa and its physiological function of mucociliary mechanism. Also, patients usually experience only minimal discomfort. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery has better success rates than conventional polypectomy and is less traumatic to the patients. The complication rate for this procedure is lower than that for conventional sinus surgery.
Keywords
Nasal Polyps, Polypectomy, FESSReferences
- Martin E. Vancil. A historical survey of treatments for nasal polyposis. The Laryngoscope 1968; 435-445.
- Ramesh C. Deka. Antrochoanal polyps: Its pathogenesis, origin and management by FESS. Ind J Otology Head Neck Surg 1999; 51:33-35.
- Stammberger Heinz. FESS – The Messerklinger Technique. Mosby Yearbook 1991. Pg. xii.
- Wigand ME. Transnasal Ethmoidectomy under Endoscopic Control. Rhinology 1981; 19: 7-10
- Wigand ME, Steiner W, Jaumann MP. Endonasal sinus surgery with endoscopic control from radical operation to rehabilitation of the mucosa. Endoscopy 1978; 10: 255-260.
- Levine HL. Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: Evaluation, Surgery and follow up of 250 patients. Laryngoscope 1990; 100: 79-84.
- Wynn and Has EL. Recurrence rates after Endoscopic Sinus Surgery. Laryngoscope 2004; 114: 118-120.
- Drake Lee AB. Nasal Polyps, Scott Brown’s Otolaryngology, Vol. 4, 6th edition, Butterworth-Heinemann 1997; Chapter 4/10/1-15.
- Duncavage JA. Nasal Polyposis. Current Therapy in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery 1994; 6th edition, Mosby Inc. 366-369.
- Gindy AE, Mansour MH. The role of transcanine surgery in Antrochoanal Polyps. J Laryngol Otol 1994; 108: 1055-1057.
- Mayers D, Myers EN. The medical and surgical treatments of nasal polyps. Laryngoscope 1994; 84: 833-847.
- Stammberger H. Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery. Ed Decker BC, Philadelphia 1991; 17-87 / 145-268.
- Jean Michel Klossek. Diffused nasal polyposis: Postoperative long-term results after endoscopic sinus surgery and frontal irrigation. Otolaryngology Head and neck surgery 1997; 117(4): 355-361.
- Neena Chowdhary, Rajeev Kapoor, Gul Motwani, Gandotra SC. FESS results in 69 patients. Ind J Otolaryngol and Head and Neck Surg 1999; 52(1): 5-8.
- Deka Ramesh. Antrochoanal polyp: Its pathogenesis, origin and management by FESS. Indian journal of otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery 1999; 51(1): 33-35.
- Freitas MR, Giesta RP, Pinheiro D, Sitva VC. Antrochoanal polyp review of 16 cases. Rev Bras Otrorhinolaryngology (Engl Ed) 2006; 72(6): 831-5.
- Yuca K, Bayran I., Kiroglu A.F, Etlik O, Cankaya H., Silcin F, Kiris M. Evaluation and treatment of antrochoanal polyp. J Otolaryngol 2006; 34 (6): 420-423.
- Wang H, Zhang L, Zhou B, Zhang W, Liu HC, Liu M. Huang Q. Relationship between allergic factors and chronic sinusitis with or without nasal polyposis. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2005; 40 (3): 168-71.
- Jovicevic J, Kljajic V. Nasal polyposis and allergic rhinitis. Srp Arh Celok Lek 2005; 133 (supplement 2): 105-7.
- Hemanth Chopra AS, Khurana, Manish Munjal, Kapil Due. Indian journal of Otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery 2006; 58(2).
- Dalsiel K, Stein K, Round A, Garside R, Royke P. Systematic review of endoscopic Sinus surgery for nasal polyp. Health Technol Assess 2003; 7(17): 1-159.
- Venkatachalam et al. Comparative evaluation of endoscopic and conventional Surgical techniques in the management of nasal polyposis. J K Practitioner 1998; 5(4): 295-299.
- Bussaba et al. Endoscopic sinus surgery for inflammatory maxillary sinus disease. Laryngoscope 2002; 112: 1378-1383.
- Zhang et al. The clinical application of FESS and conventional technique in sinus Surgery. Zhongua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi 1998; 33(6): 354-355.