Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Context: Recent data suggest mesenteric tumor deposits (MTDs) indicate poor prognosis in small bowel well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (SB-NETs), including compared to positive lymph nodes, making their distinction crucial.
Objective: To study interobserver agreement in distinguishing SB-NET MTDs from positive nodes.
Design: Virtual slides from 36 locally metastatic SB-NET foci were shared among 7 gastrointestinal pathologists, who interpreted each as an MTD or a positive node. Observers ranked their 5 preferred choices among a supplied list of potentially useful histologic features, for both options. Diagnostic opinions were compared using Fleiss multirater and Cohen weighted κ analyses.
Results: Preferred criteria for MTD included irregular shape (n = 7, top choice for 5), perineural invasion/nerve entrapment (n = 7, top choice for 2), encased thick-walled vessels (n = 7), and prominent fibrosis (n = 6). Preferred criteria for positive nodes included peripheral lymphoid follicles (n = 6, top choice for 4), round shape (n = 7, top choice for 2), peripheral lymphocyte rim (n = 7, top choice for 1), subcapsular sinuses (n = 7), and a capsule (n = 6). Among 36 foci, 10 (28%) each were unanimously diagnosed as MTD or positive node. For 13 foci (36%), there was a diagnosis favored by most observers (5 or 6 of 7): positive node in 8, MTD in 5. Only 3 cases (8%) had a near-even (4:3) split. Overall agreement was substantial (κ = .64, P < .001).
Conclusions: Substantial interobserver agreement exists for distinguishing SB-NET MTDs from lymph node metastases. Favored histologic criteria in making the distinction include irregular shape and nerve/vessel entrapment for MTD, and peripheral lymphocytes/lymphoid follicles and round shape for positive nodes.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2023-0169-OA | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!