Quality Assessment of Gallbladder Cancer Pathology Reports: A Dutch Nationwide Study

Abstract

Simple Summary Appropriate reporting of pathological findings is required for optimal patient care and to perform high-quality research. The aim of our study was to assess the completeness of pathology reports of gallbladder cancer (GBC) in a large nation-wide patient cohort from the Netherlands. Results showed that reports were often incomplete; information on essential items that can predict prognosis were often missing. Whereas certain items were often missing in the report, they could be retrospectively detected in a large proportion of patients during pathology review. Our findings showed that significant improvements could be made in the reporting of gallbladder cancer in the Netherlands. To this end, the added value of standardized (synoptic) reporting should be explored, of which the beneficial effects have already been demonstrated in other tumor types. Abstract Adequate reporting of pathological findings is essential for optimal patient management and to perform high-quality research. The aim of this study was to assess the completeness of pathology reports of gallbladder cancer (GBC) at the nationwide level to assess guideline adherence and make recommendations for improvement. A retrospective population-based cohort of GBC patients diagnosed in the Netherlands from 2000 to 2019 was collected using data from the Dutch Cancer Registry and the nationwide network and registry of histology. Pathology reports were scored on the presence and content of essential and optional items according to the Dutch consensus-based guideline on biliary tract cancer. By histopathological review of cases, we compared findings with the conclusion of the corresponding pathology report. All pathology reports (n = 849) had a narrative, nonstructured format. Overall completeness was low. Information on key prognostic factors, such as tumor side (hepatic vs. serosal), status of cystic duct and liver surgical margins and venous and perineural invasion, was frequently lacking (80%, 23%, 59%, 74% and 74% missing, respectively). Whereas certain items were often missing from the report, they could be retrospectively detected in a substantial proportion of cases during pathology review (n = 738). In conclusion, significant improvements could be made in the reporting of GBC in the Netherlands. Synoptic reporting could greatly enhance the completeness of reports, as already demonstrated for tumor types.