Comparison of examination of the entire uterine cervix with routine cervical sampling in hysterectomy specimens from women with endometrial cancer
- 1Department of Cellular Pathology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, UK
- 2Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- 3Department of Cellular Pathology, Nottingham University Hospital, Queen’s Medical Centre Campus, UK
- Dr P A Cross, Department of Pathology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, Tyne and Wear NE9 6SX, UK;
- Accepted 23 October 2007
- Published Online First 15 November 2007
Background: Cervical involvement by endometrial cancer alters the FIGO stage and determines clinical management, but there are no accepted guidelines for cervical sampling of these cases.
Aim: To assess whether sampling more than two “routine” blocks of the cervix (anterior and posterior) alters the pathological staging of hysterectomy specimens for endometrial cancer.
Methods: Histological involvement of the cervix was prospectively compared in hysterectomies performed for proven endometrial cancer (n = 61). Specimens had two “routine” blocks taken from anterior and posterior cervix; all of the remaining cervix was also processed for histological assessment.
Results: 61 cases of endometrial cancer had the entire uterine cervix processed. There were 54 cases of endometrioid adenocarcinoma and 7 special types. Twelve cases had cervical involvement (stage 2A or 2B), and seven cases were stage 3A or above, of which three also had cervical involvement. In none of the 61 cases did the additional cervical blocks (n = 544) taken alter the staging made on the “routine” blocks.
Conclusion: Sampling of two blocks from the cervix appears sufficient for histological staging of endometrial cancer in hysterectomy specimens.
Competing interests: None declared.