Abstract

One hundred retrospective appendectomy specimens were examined in an attempt to study the degree of uniformity and clarity of reporting of this common surgical specimen. There was full agreement in 73 cases and some degree of discrepancy in 27 cases. It is suggested that greater clarity in reporting can be achieved with five reporting categories: (i) established acute inflammation; (ii) no evidence of acute inflammation ("normal"); (iii) features suggestive of early inflammation; (iv) peri-appendicitis; (v) other features, such as granulomata, Enterobius vermicularis, tumours, etc.