Update to the College of American Pathologists Reporting on Thyroid Carcinomas

Background The reporting of thyroid carcinomas follows the recommendations of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) protocols and includes papillary carcinoma, follicular carcinoma, anaplastic carcinoma and medullary carcinoma. Despite past and recent efforts, there are a number of controversial issues in the classification and diagnosis of thyroid carcinomas (TC) that, potentially impact on therapy and prognosis of patients with TC. Discussion The most updated version of the CAP thyroid cancer protocol incorporates recent changes in histologic classification as well as changes in the staging of thyroid cancers as per the updated American Joint Commission on Cancer staging manual. Among the more contentious issues in the pathology of thyroid carcinoma include the defining criteria for tumor invasiveness. While there are defined criteria for invasion, there is not universal agreement in what constitutes capsular invasion, angioinvasion and extrathyroidal invasion. Irrespective of the discrepant views on invasion, pathologists should report on the presence and extent (focal, widely) of capsular invasion, angioinvasion and extrathyroidal extension. These findings assist clinicians in their assessment of the recurrence risk and potential for metastatic disease. It is beyond the scope of this paper to detail the entire CAP protocol for thyroid carcinomas; rather, this paper addresses some of the more problematic issues confronting pathologists in their assessment and reporting of thyroid carcinomas. Conclusion The new CAP protocol for reporting of thyroid carcinomas is a step toward improving the clinical value of the histopathologic reporting of TC. Large meticulous clinico-pathologic and molecular studies with long term follow up are still needed in order to increase the impact of microscopic examination on the prognosis and management of TC

Comparison of Pelvic Landmarks for Leg Length Discrepancy Measurement With Robotic Arm-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background: Leg length discrepancy (LLD) is a common complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) leading to significant morbidity and dissatisfaction for patients. A popular system for robotic arm-assisted THA utilizes preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans for surgical planning. Accurate measurement of leg length is crucial for restoring appropriate patient anatomy during the procedure. This study investigates the interobserver and interlandmark reliability of 3 different pelvic landmarks for measuring preoperative LLD. Methods: We compiled preoperative pelvic CT scans from 99 robotic arm-assisted THAs for osteoarthritis. Radiologic leg length measurement was performed using the robotic arm-assisted THA application by 2 orthopaedic residents using reference lines bisecting the following pelvic landmarks: the anterior superior iliac spines, acetabular teardrops, and most inferior aspect of the ischial rami. Results: On multivariate analysis, there was no significant difference found (P value = .924) for leg length measurement based on the 3 different pelvic anatomical landmarks. Leg length measurements showed interobserver reliability with significant Pearson correlation coefficients (r = 1.0, 0.94, 0.96, respectively) and nonsignificant differences in LLD means between subjects on paired sample (P value = .158, .085, 0.125, respectively) as well as between landmarks on pairwise comparison. Conclusions: The 3 pelvic landmarks used in this study can be used interchangeably with the lesser trochanter as the femoral reference point to evaluate preoperative LLD on pelvic CT in patients undergoing robotic-arm assisted THA. This study is the first of its kind to evaluate the interobserver and interlandmark reliability of anatomical landmarks on pelvic CT scans and suggests interchangeability of 3 pelvic landmarks for comparing leg length differences

Reproducing knowledge: Xerox and the story of knowledge management

This paper is a commentary on discursive transformations found in stories told about Xerox’s photocopier technicians, comparing particularly Orr’s brilliant ethnographic study and a later management case study. It argues that significant shifts take place in how knowledge is understood between these accounts so that what begins as elusive, oral, improvised and social becomes increasingly presented as encodable in a structured database, countable, auditable, individualistic. These ideological transformations seem partly to be a result of the needs of the genre of case study, and partly to do with Xerox’s own historic need to rebrand itself, and simply to sell a commercial product. The paper stresses the need to capture complexity in case studies if they are to promote a realistic or critical understanding of the organisation