Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Routine histopathological analysis of bone extracted during total joint replacement is controversial.

Objectives: To evaluate the utility of routine histopathological analysis in total joint replacement.

Methods: We calculated the risk for discrepant diagnosis between the pre- and postoperative histopathological results by performing a meta-analysis of 11 studies (including our data). We also calculated the risk for significant discrepancies.

Results: The discrepant diagnoses analysis showed a random effect of 3% discrepancies (95% confidence interval 1.2–3.7%). Funnel plot indicates a publication bias; consequently, the conclusions from this analysis should be interpreted with caution. Regarding the significant discrepancy in diagnosis, we performed a meta-analysis of nine studies. Fixed-effects analysis of all the studies resulted in 0.16% significant discrepancies (95% CI[1] 0.02–0.30%) with no heterogeneity (Q = 3.93, degrees of freedom = 9, P = 0.14, I² = 49.2%), and appropriate fixed-effects models.

Conclusions: We recommend no further routine histological examination, reserving this tool for cases with a controversial primary diagnosis and unexpected findings during the operation.

Background: An accurate preoperative definition of tumor and lymph node status is needed for reaching the correct decision regarding rectal cancer treatment. Transrectal ultrasonography is the most commonly used diagnostic modality for the local staging of rectal cancer.

Objectives: To determine the accuracy of TRUS[1] in the staging of rectal cancer.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on 95 patients evaluated by TRUS. The rectum was subdivided into two parts (lower and upper).

Results: Sixty patients underwent radical surgery. Of these, 34 received no preoperative chemo-irradiation owing to µT1, µT2 tumor or the patient’s choice (neo-adjuvant treatment was suggested to patients with adenocarcinoma that proved to be µT3). The overall accuracy rate was 80% for T stage. Overstaging was found in 13.3% and understaging in 6.7%.The N-stage was correctly assessed in 70%. The overall accuracy rate for tumors was 73.9% in the lower part and 90.9% in the upper. A trend towards a lower accuracy rate for low-lying tumors compared to high-located rectal tumors was found (P = 0.532), which did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions: TRUS gave better results for T1 and T3 stage rectal tumors but was inaccurate for stage T2, indicating the possible need for local excision in order to base the final treatment for T2 tumors on pathologic staging.
[1] TRUS = transrectal ultrasonography