Retrospective analysis of radiological investigation of surgically excised head and neck lipomas.

PURPOSE: Differentiating benign lipomas from malignant causes is challenging and preoperative investigative guidelines are not well-defined. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively identify cases of head and neck lipomas that were surgically resected over a 5-year period and to identify the radiological modality chosen and features discussed in the final report. Multidisciplinary outcomes and pathology reports were examined with a view to identifying high risk features of a lipoma to aid in future risk stratification. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of pathology characteristics, radiological features (modality, size, calcifications, septations, globular/nodular foci), multidisciplinary discussion and history of presenting complaint was performed. RESULTS: Two liposarcomas and 138 lipomas were identified. Twenty-two percent of all lipomas received radiological investigation. Twenty-two percent of imaging referrals were possibly inappropriate. Furthermore, radiological features suggestive of malignancy were not present in the final radiology report, X2 = 28.8, p < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: As expected, the incidence of liposarcoma is low. There is limited awareness of radiology referral guidelines superimposed with a tendency to over-investigate lipomas. Furthermore, radiological features suggestive of malignancy were inconsistently reported on and not documented in multidisciplinary discussions. Therefore, we propose a multidisciplinary checklist for referring physicians and radiologists to aid in diagnostic work-up.

Mastectomy scar histopathology of limited clinical value.

This study assesses whether the routine submission of mastectomy scars for histologic examination at the time of delayed breast reconstruction is useful. A retrospective review was performed of all delayed breast reconstructions for breast cancer performed by a single surgeon over a 5-year period from January 2000 to December 2004. One hundred eighty-eight patients underwent delayed breast reconstruction during this period, and of these, 133 scars (1 patient had bilateral scars excised) were submitted for histology where the reconstruction was performed by either transversus rectus abdominus muscle flap (TRAM) or latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (LDF) +/- implant. Fifty-six patients had reconstruction performed by tissue expander through the inframammary crease where the original mastectomy scar was not excised and were excluded from the study. One mastectomy scar specimen showed a 2-mm suspicious area of invasive ductal carcinoma consistent with same histopathology at the time of mastectomy. This study corroborates evidence that it is questionable whether routine histopathology of mastectomy scar at the time of delayed breast reconstruction should not be a standard practice.