Is Routine Pathologic Evaluation of Sebaceous Cysts Necessary? A 15-Year Retrospective Review of a Single Institution

Vipul Gargya, Heather D. Lucas, Amy J. Wendel Spiczka, Raman Chaos Mahabir

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

ABSTRACT: A question arose in our practice of whether all cysts considered sebaceous should be sent for pathologic evaluation. To address this controversial topic, we performed a retrospective study of our single institutionʼs histopathology database. A natural language search of the CoPath database across the institution was undertaken using the diagnosis of sebaceous cyst, epidermal cyst, epidermoid cyst, epithelial cyst, infundibular cyst, pilar cyst, trichilemmal cyst, and steatocystoma. A surgical pathologic review of all specimens with one of these preexcision diagnoses was included in the 15-year retrospective study of 1998 to 2013. All slides were confirmed to have undergone histopathologic review, and the preexcision diagnoses were compared with the postexcision diagnoses. Chart review was undertaken in instances of a diagnosis of malignancy. A total of 13,746 samples were identified. Forty-eight specimens had histopathologic diagnosis of malignancy, for an incidence of 0.3% and with the most common malignancy being squamous cell carcinoma. Chart review showed that for all cases, the surgeons reported uncertainty with regard to the diagnosis because of history or physical characteristics, or both. In addition, a comprehensive literature review showed results consistent with our data and illustrated 19 cases during the past 10 years in which most of the findings were squamous cell carcinoma. We propose the recommendation that routine pathologic evaluation of sebaceous cysts is necessary only when clinical suspicion exists.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAnnals of Plastic Surgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Apr 7 2016

Fingerprint

Epidermal Cyst
Cysts
Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Retrospective Studies
Databases
Neoplasms
Uncertainty
Language
History
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Is Routine Pathologic Evaluation of Sebaceous Cysts Necessary? A 15-Year Retrospective Review of a Single Institution. / Gargya, Vipul; Lucas, Heather D.; Wendel Spiczka, Amy J.; Mahabir, Raman Chaos.

In: Annals of Plastic Surgery, 07.04.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gargya, Vipul ; Lucas, Heather D. ; Wendel Spiczka, Amy J. ; Mahabir, Raman Chaos. / Is Routine Pathologic Evaluation of Sebaceous Cysts Necessary? A 15-Year Retrospective Review of a Single Institution. In: Annals of Plastic Surgery. 2016.
@article{e88ac4b03bfd4d5c8db7a468f51354f2,
title = "Is Routine Pathologic Evaluation of Sebaceous Cysts Necessary?: A 15-Year Retrospective Review of a Single Institution",
abstract = "ABSTRACT: A question arose in our practice of whether all cysts considered sebaceous should be sent for pathologic evaluation. To address this controversial topic, we performed a retrospective study of our single institutionʼs histopathology database. A natural language search of the CoPath database across the institution was undertaken using the diagnosis of sebaceous cyst, epidermal cyst, epidermoid cyst, epithelial cyst, infundibular cyst, pilar cyst, trichilemmal cyst, and steatocystoma. A surgical pathologic review of all specimens with one of these preexcision diagnoses was included in the 15-year retrospective study of 1998 to 2013. All slides were confirmed to have undergone histopathologic review, and the preexcision diagnoses were compared with the postexcision diagnoses. Chart review was undertaken in instances of a diagnosis of malignancy. A total of 13,746 samples were identified. Forty-eight specimens had histopathologic diagnosis of malignancy, for an incidence of 0.3{\%} and with the most common malignancy being squamous cell carcinoma. Chart review showed that for all cases, the surgeons reported uncertainty with regard to the diagnosis because of history or physical characteristics, or both. In addition, a comprehensive literature review showed results consistent with our data and illustrated 19 cases during the past 10 years in which most of the findings were squamous cell carcinoma. We propose the recommendation that routine pathologic evaluation of sebaceous cysts is necessary only when clinical suspicion exists.",
author = "Vipul Gargya and Lucas, {Heather D.} and {Wendel Spiczka}, {Amy J.} and Mahabir, {Raman Chaos}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1097/SAP.0000000000000826",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Annals of Plastic Surgery",
issn = "0148-7043",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is Routine Pathologic Evaluation of Sebaceous Cysts Necessary?

T2 - A 15-Year Retrospective Review of a Single Institution

AU - Gargya, Vipul

AU - Lucas, Heather D.

AU - Wendel Spiczka, Amy J.

AU - Mahabir, Raman Chaos

PY - 2016/4/7

Y1 - 2016/4/7

N2 - ABSTRACT: A question arose in our practice of whether all cysts considered sebaceous should be sent for pathologic evaluation. To address this controversial topic, we performed a retrospective study of our single institutionʼs histopathology database. A natural language search of the CoPath database across the institution was undertaken using the diagnosis of sebaceous cyst, epidermal cyst, epidermoid cyst, epithelial cyst, infundibular cyst, pilar cyst, trichilemmal cyst, and steatocystoma. A surgical pathologic review of all specimens with one of these preexcision diagnoses was included in the 15-year retrospective study of 1998 to 2013. All slides were confirmed to have undergone histopathologic review, and the preexcision diagnoses were compared with the postexcision diagnoses. Chart review was undertaken in instances of a diagnosis of malignancy. A total of 13,746 samples were identified. Forty-eight specimens had histopathologic diagnosis of malignancy, for an incidence of 0.3% and with the most common malignancy being squamous cell carcinoma. Chart review showed that for all cases, the surgeons reported uncertainty with regard to the diagnosis because of history or physical characteristics, or both. In addition, a comprehensive literature review showed results consistent with our data and illustrated 19 cases during the past 10 years in which most of the findings were squamous cell carcinoma. We propose the recommendation that routine pathologic evaluation of sebaceous cysts is necessary only when clinical suspicion exists.

AB - ABSTRACT: A question arose in our practice of whether all cysts considered sebaceous should be sent for pathologic evaluation. To address this controversial topic, we performed a retrospective study of our single institutionʼs histopathology database. A natural language search of the CoPath database across the institution was undertaken using the diagnosis of sebaceous cyst, epidermal cyst, epidermoid cyst, epithelial cyst, infundibular cyst, pilar cyst, trichilemmal cyst, and steatocystoma. A surgical pathologic review of all specimens with one of these preexcision diagnoses was included in the 15-year retrospective study of 1998 to 2013. All slides were confirmed to have undergone histopathologic review, and the preexcision diagnoses were compared with the postexcision diagnoses. Chart review was undertaken in instances of a diagnosis of malignancy. A total of 13,746 samples were identified. Forty-eight specimens had histopathologic diagnosis of malignancy, for an incidence of 0.3% and with the most common malignancy being squamous cell carcinoma. Chart review showed that for all cases, the surgeons reported uncertainty with regard to the diagnosis because of history or physical characteristics, or both. In addition, a comprehensive literature review showed results consistent with our data and illustrated 19 cases during the past 10 years in which most of the findings were squamous cell carcinoma. We propose the recommendation that routine pathologic evaluation of sebaceous cysts is necessary only when clinical suspicion exists.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84963685542&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84963685542&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000826

DO - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000826

M3 - Article

C2 - 27070686

AN - SCOPUS:84963685542

JO - Annals of Plastic Surgery

JF - Annals of Plastic Surgery

SN - 0148-7043

ER -