Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Is the Correct Procedure for Handling the Surgical Specimen?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Multidisciplinary Management of Rectal Cancer

  • 980 Accesses

Abstract

In spite of recent developments in the preoperative imaging of rectal cancer using endoluminal ultrasound, CT scans, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and PET-CT, pathological examination of the operative specimen remains a key part of the management of the rectal cancer patient. The pathologists report allows the patient to be placed in a prognostic category, indicates the likelihood of tumour recurrence and determines the need for post-operative adjuvant therapy. A good macroscopic description, especially when supplemented by high-quality digital images, facilitates audit of the quality of radiology and surgery. Following neoadjuvant treatment, pathological examination provides an immediate indication of how sensitive the tumour is to radio- and chemotherapy. Finally, the accurate recording of a minimum standardised pathological data set is vital to stratification and interpretation of clinical trials, comparison of outcomes between different centres and health-care systems, evaluation of the impact of population-based interventions such as bowel cancer screening and the conduct of epidemiological studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Abdulkader M, Abdulla K, Rakha E, Kaye P (2006) Routine elastic staining assists detection of vascular invasion in colorectal cancer. Histopathology 49:487–492

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG et al (1994) Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 344:707–711

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Andreola S, Leo E, Belli F et al (1996) Manual dissection of adenocarcinoma of the lower third of the rectum specimens for detection of lymph node metastases smaller than 5 mm. Cancer 77:607–612

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Beddy D, Hyland JMP, Winter DC et al (2008) A simplified tumor regression grade correlates with survival in locally advanced rectal carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 15:3471–3477

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bedrosian I, Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Feig B et al (2004) Predicting the node-negative mesorectum after preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 8:56–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ et al (2002) Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 235:449–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Branston LK, Greening S, Newcombe RG et al (2002) The implementation of guidelines and computerised forms improves the completeness of cancer pathology reporting. The CROPS project: a randomised controlled trial in pathology. Eur J Cancer 38:743–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bujko K, Nowacki MP, Nasierowska-Guttmejer A et al (2006) Long term results of a randomized trial comparing preoperative short-course radiotherapy with preoperative conventionally fractionated chemoradiation for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 93:1215–1223

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cawthorn SJ, Parums DV, Gibbs NM et al (1990) Extent of mesorectal spread and involvement of lateral resection margin as prognostic factors after surgery for rectal cancer. Lancet 335:1055–1059

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dworak O, Keilholz L, Hoffman A (1997) Pathological features of rectal cancer after preoperative radiochemotherapy. Int J Colorectal Dis 12:19–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Engelen SME, Beets-Tan RGH, Lahaye MJ, Kessels AGH, Beets GL (2008) Location of involved mesorectal and extramesorectal lymph nodes in patients with primary rectal cancer: preoperative assessment with MR imaging. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:776–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Goldstein NS, Turner JR (2000) Pericolonic tumor deposits in patients with T3N  +  M0 colon adenocarcinomas. Cancer 88:2228–2238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamilton SR, Bosman FT, Boffetta P et al (2010) Carcinoma of the colon and rectum. In: Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH, Theise ND (eds) WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system. IARC, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jeyarajah S, Sutton CD, Miller AS, Hemingway D (2007) Factors that influence the adequacy of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 9:808–815

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Leonard D, Penninckx F, Fieuws S et al (2010) Factors predicting quality of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg 252:982–988

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lewin MR, Fenton H, Burkart AL et al (2007) Poorly differentiated colorectal carcinoma with invasion restricted to lamina propria (intramucosal carcinoma): a follow-up study of 15 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 31:1882–1886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Littleford SE, Baird A, Rotimi O, Verbeke C, Scott N (2009) Interobserver variation in the reporting of local peritoneal involvement and extramural venous invasion in colon cancer. Histopathology 55:407–413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mandard A, Dalibard F, Mandard J et al (1994) Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 73:2680–2686

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Marijnen CAM, Nagtegaal ID, Kranenbarg EK et al (2001) No downstaging after short-term preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 19:1976–1984

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mercury Study Group (2007) Extramural depth of tumour invasion at thin-section MR in patients with rectal cancer: results of the MERCURY Study. Radiology 243:132–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Merkel S, Mansmann U, Siassi M, Papadopoulos T, Hohenberger W, Hermanek P (2001) The prognostic inhomogeneity in pT3 rectal carcinomas. Int J Colorectal Dis 16:298–304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Mitchard JR, Love SB, Baxter KJ, Shepherd NA (2010) How important is peritoneal involvement in rectal cancer ? A prospective study of 331 cases. Histopathology 57:671–679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Morris EJA, Maughan NJ, Forman D, Quirke P (2007) Who to treat with adjuvant therapy in dukes B/stage II colorectal cancer? The need for high quality pathology. Gut 56:1419–1425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CAM, Kranenbarg EK et al (2002) Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimetre but two millimetres is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol 26:350–357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2008) What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:303–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nagtegaal ID, Tot T, Jayne DG et al (2011) Lymph nodes, tumor deposits and TNM: are we getting better ? J Clin Oncol 29:2487–2492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nagtegaal ID, Van de Velde CJH, Marijnen CAM, Van Krieken JHJM, Quirke P (2005) Low rectal cancer: a call for a change of approach in abdominoperineal resection. J Clin Oncol 23:9257–9264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nagtegaal ID, Van de Velde CJH, Van der Worp E et al (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20:1729–1734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS (1986) Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision. Lancet 2(8514):996–998

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Quirke P (2003) CORE study: capecitabine/oxaliplatin, radiotherapy and excision protocol Study No. C8601. Pathological technique. Sanofi-Aventis, Appendix 7. Lancet Oncol 4(11):695–702

    Google Scholar 

  31. Quirke P, Morris E (2007) Reporting colorectal cancer. Histopathology 50:103–112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J et al (2009) Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016 randomised clinical trial. Lancet 373:821–828

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ratto C, Ricci R, Rossi C, Morelli U, Vecchio FM, Doglietto GB (2002) Mesorectal microfoci adversely affect the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 45:733–743

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Rullier A, Laurent C, Capdepont M et al (2008) Lymph nodes after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma: number, status and impact on survival. Am J Surg Pathol 32:45–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sebag-Montefiore D, Stephens RJ, Steele R et al (2009) Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multi-centre, randomised trial. Lancet 373:811–820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Shepherd NA, Baxter KJ, Love SB (1995) Influence of local peritoneal involvement on pelvic recurrence and prognosis in rectal cancer. J Clin Pathol 48:849–855

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Shepherd NA, Baxter KJ, Love SB (1997) The prognostic importance of peritoneal involvement in colonic cancer: a prospective evaluation. Gastroenterology 112:1096–1102

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Shia J, McManus M, Guillem JG et al (2011) Significance of acellular mucin pools in rectal carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Am J Surg Pathol 35:127–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Shihab OC, Quirke P, Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Brown G (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging detected lymph nodes close to the mesorectal fascia are rarely a cause of margin involvement after total mesorectal excision. Br J Surg 97:1431–1436

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Shirouzu K, Isomoto H, Kakegawa T (1995) Distal spread of rectal cancer and optimal distal margin of resection for sphincter-preserving surgery. Cancer 76:388–392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Sobin LH, Wittekind C (eds) (1997) International union against cancer TNM classification of malignant tumors, 5th edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  42. Sobin LH, Wittekind C (eds) (2002) International union against cancer TNM classification of malignant tumors, 6th edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz M, Wittekind C (eds) (2009) International union against cancer TNM classification of malignant tumors, 7th edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  44. Sternberg A, Mizrahi A, Amar M, Groisman G (2006) Detection of venous invasion in surgical specimens of colorectal carcinoma: the efficacy of various types of tissue blocks. J Clin Pathol 59:207–210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Talbot IC, Ritchie S, Leighton MH, Hughes AO, Bussey HJR, Morson BC (1980) The clinical significance of invasion of veins by rectal cancer. Br J Surg 67:439–442

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Taylor FGM, Quirke P, Heald RJ et al (2011) Preoperative high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging can identify good prognosis stage I, II and III rectal cancer best managed by surgery alone. Ann Surg 253:711–719

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tekkis PP, Heriot AG, Smith J, Thompson R, Finan P, Stamatakis JD (2005) Comparison of circumferential margin involvement between restorative and nonrestorative resections for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 7:369–374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Tepper JE, O’Connell MJ, Niedzwiecki D et al (2001) Impact of number of nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:157–163

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Van Wyk Q, Hosie KB, Balsitis M (2000) Histopathological detection of lymph node metastases from colorectal carcinoma. J Clin Pathol 53:685–687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Vass DG, Ainsworth R, Anderson JH, Murray D, Foulis AK (2004) The value of an elastic tissue stain in detecting venous invasion in colorectal cancer. J Clin Pathol 57:769–772

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Vecchio FM, Valentini V, Minsky BD et al (2005) The relationship of pathologic tumor regression grade (TRG) and outcomes after preoperative therapy in rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:752–760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. West NP, Anderin C, Smith KJE, Holm T, Quirke P (2010) Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:588–599

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Wiig JN, Larsen SG, Dueland S, Giercksky K (2005) Clinical outcome in patients with complete pathologic response (pT0) to preoperative irradiation/chemo-irradiation operated for locally advanced or locally recurrent rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 92:70–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Williams GT, Quirke P, Shepherd NA (2007) The Royal College of Pathologists dataset for colorectal cancer, 2nd edn. The Royal College of Pathologists, London, http://www.rcpath.org=ersol;resources/pdf/colorectalcancer.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  55. Wittekind C, Compton C, Quirke P et al (2009) A uniform residual tumor (R) classification. Cancer 115:3483–3488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Histopathology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, St James University Hospital, Leeds, UK

    Nigel Scott

Authors
  1. Nigel Scott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nigel Scott .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Dept. of Radiation Therapy, Università Cattolica S.Cuore, Largo A.Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy

    Vincenzo Valentini

  2. Klinik und Poliklinik Innere Medizin IV, Abt. Hämatologie und Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, Halle, 06097, Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany

    Hans-Joachim Schmoll

  3. Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2333 ZA, Netherlands

    Cornelis J. H. van de Velde

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Scott, N. (2012). What Is the Correct Procedure for Handling the Surgical Specimen?. In: Valentini, V., Schmoll, HJ., van de Velde, C. (eds) Multidisciplinary Management of Rectal Cancer. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25005-7_30

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25005-7_30

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-25004-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-25005-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation