Research ArticleAssessment of pathology reports on hilar cholangiocarcinoma: The results of a nationwide, multicenter survey performed by the AFC-HC-2009 study group

Background & AimsTo assess the accuracy of pathology reports in patients operated on for hilar cholangiocarcinoma.MethodsPathology reports for 263 patients operated on in 22 tertiary hepatobiliary centers were reviewed. The report format, turnaround time, tissue specimens, intraoperative consultations, macroscopic and microscopic descriptions, and conclusions were assessed.ResultsSurgeons provided pathologists with pertinent clinical and imaging data in only 14% of cases and gave information on specimen orientation in only 24% of cases. The reports frequently failed to give information on prognostic histological factors: tumor differentiation (missing in 27% of cases), vascular invasion (45%), tumor thickness (99%), and infiltration of the bile duct surgical margins (4%). Distances between the tumor and the vessel margin, liver margin and the periductal soft tissue circumferential margin were not specified in 87%, 79%, and 89% of cases, respectively. Only 21% of the reports gave the pTNM stage in the conclusion section. A lack of information prevented retrospective pTNM staging in 48% of cases. Three percent of the reports had discrepancies in their conclusion section.ConclusionsOur French, nationwide study revealed that pathology reports on hilar cholangiocarcinoma frequently lack important information on the main prognostic histological factors and pTNM staging. We recommend the use of a standardized pathology report in this context.