Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 22, 2025

Intraoperative Assessment of Resection Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: This is the Way
Published on: May 10, 2021
Timely Review and Communication of Histopathology Reports Following Appendicectomy: Insights from a Two-Cycle
Christine-Bianca Hanganu1, Sanad Isswiasi2, Abiodun Adigun3
1General Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, GBR.
Introduction:
Appendicectomy is the most frequent emergency general surgical procedure. Prior research highlights the importance of histopathology analysis after appendicectomy which is the practice in many countries including the United Kingdom (UK), aiming to prevent any oversight of vital findings and the avoidance of potential delays in patient care. Our primary objective was to audit the extent to which surgeons adhere to the NHS England patient safety guidelines from 2016 when it comes to timely reviewing and effectively communicating histopathology results to patients and/or their general practitioners following appendicectomy procedures. Our secondary objective was to amend practice, if deemed necessary, following the implementation of agreed-upon protocols, with the expected improvements being observable in the second cycle of the audit.
Methods:
In our two-cycle audit, we performed a retrospective analysis using online patient records from a single centre in the UK. The initial cycle involved cases of emergency appendectomies carried out consecutively for suspected appendicitis from April 2018 to June 2019. Following the clinical governance meeting and the implementation of recommendations, the second audit cycle covered cases between September 2020 and October 2020.
Results:
In the first cycle, among 418 laparoscopic appendectomies, 207 (49.52%) and 47 reports (11.24%) were reviewed within a 15-day and a 16-30-day window, respectively, following the online availability of histopathology results. Notably, 116 reports (27.75%) remained unreviewed by surgeons, and only 67 (16.02%) of these reports documented communication with patients and/or their general practitioners. In the second cycle, involving 49 patients, 38 reports (77.55%) were reviewed within the first 15 days, and 10 reports (20.4%) were reviewed between 16-30 days. Among these, 16 reports (32.65%) documented communication with patients and/or their general practitioners.
Conclusions:
Our adherence to the aforementioned guidance was poor prior to this audit. This two-cycle audit highlighted the need for improvement in the timely review and communication of histopathology reports following appendectomy at our centre. The second cycle showed promising progress, suggesting that changes implemented between the cycles had a positive impact. Nevertheless, continuous efforts may be required to enhance and sustain adherence to these vital patient safety guidelines.
Related Concept Videos
Appendicitis-II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Diagnosing Appendicitis
It requires a multifaceted approach, starting with a detailed physical examination to pinpoint the location and nature of the pain and identify any associated symptoms. Laboratory tests play a crucial role. A complete Blood Count (CBC) typically reveals leukocytosis (an increased number of...
Appendicitis-I: Introduction
Etiology: Appendicitis can arise from various causes, primarily rooted in the obstruction of the appendix lumen. Factors contributing to this obstruction include fecal accumulation, lymphoid hyperplasia and, in...
Assessment of the Abdomen I: Inspection and Auscultation
The abdominal examination is a cornerstone of clinical medicine, serving as a critical tool in diagnosing various gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. It involves a systematic approach that includes inspection and auscultation, each with distinct yet complementary roles in assessing the abdomen. This article will delve into these two primary methods healthcare professionals use to examine the abdomen.
Inspection of the Abdomen
The first step in any abdominal examination is inspection....

