Seminars in diagnostic pathology · 2012
Issues and inconsistencies in the revised gynecologic staging systems.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cole Lisa, Stoler Mark H
Аннотация
In addition to acting as diagnosticians, surgical pathologists are increasingly becoming prognosticians. Currently there are 3 staging groups: the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC), and the International Union against Cancer (UICC), each forming its own staging system. However, despite diligent efforts, these classification systems do not yet agree in their reporting of cancer staging. Because having a uniform set of staging guidelines is essential for consistent interpretation and management of patients with cancer, we attempt to review the issues and inconsistencies that exist in the current staging guidelines. Specifically, we compare and contrast the AJCC/UICC and the parallel system formulated by FIGO in the diagnosis of cancers in the gynecologic tract, focusing on the vulva, vagina, cervix, and endometrium/uterus. Our hopes are to clarify the controversies, because a more unified system must be created to eliminate ongoing inconsistencies, and to make communication and treatment even more reliable.