Search

Introduction: Leprosy also known as Hansen's disease is one of the oldest disease known to mankind. It is a chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae. It still remains as a major public health problem facing India. Nearly, 60% of all world leprosy cases are reported from India. The spectrum of presentation of leprosy is very wide. Histopathology is an important tool in making a definitive diagnosis. The objective of the study is to describe the histopathological profile of leprosy in the state of Bihar. Aim: To study the histopathological spectrum of leprosy at a tertiary care centre of Bihar. Materials and Methods: A retrospective hospital-based study of clinically diagnosed leprosy cases was conducted over a period of 28 months (January 2015 to April 2017). Lesional skin biopsies obtained were fixed, processed and stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) followed by Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) staining. The lesions were classified on microscopy as per Ridley-Jopling classification. Results: A total of 200 cases were studied. Highest incidence was in the 11 to 30 years age group for both males and females. Males were more affected (M:F=2.4:1). Most common clinical feature was loss of sensation. The commonest reported histopathological type was borderline lepromatous (43%) followed by borderline (17%). Overall ZN staining was positive in 56 (28%) cases. Conclusion: The spectrum of presentation of leprosy is very wide and there is clinical overlap between different types of leprosy. Histopathology still remains the gold standard for early diagnosis and classification of the disease. Accurate diagnosis forms the backbone for appropriate treatment and preventing deformities and drug resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Salivary gland neoplasms account for approximately 5% of head and neck tumours. The cytomorphology of fine needle aspiration material helps determine the preoperative assessment and risk stratification. The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) was developed to improve communication between the laboratory and treatment provider. Aims and objective: In the present study, we stratified all salivary gland lesions according to the MSRSGC and evaluated each category's concordance and risk of malignancy (ROM). Materials and methods: This was a 5 year retrospective study. First, all cases were assigned to one of the six MSRSGC categories. Then, following cytohistological correlation, the concordance rates and ROM were calculated based on the final histopathology report. Results: A total of 354 cases were identified, with ages ranging from 2 to 88 years and the commonest age group was the 3rd to 4th decades. Categories I, II, III, IVA, IVB, V, and VI comprised 5.37% (19/354), 26.84% (95/354), 1.13% (04/354), 51.41% (182/354), 1.98% (07/354), 1.13% (04/354), and 12.15% (43/354) of the cases, respectively. The overall concordance rate between the cytological and histopathological diagnoses was 81.25% (65 out of 80 cases), with the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value at 43.48%, 96.49%, 83.33%, and 80.88%, respectively. Conclusion: The MSRSGC provides a better objective and structured way to communicate with the health care provider. In our study, the overall concordance rate was observed in 62/80 cases, with maximum concordance seen in categories III, IVB, and V of the MSRSGC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Adnexal masses are a common diagnosis in Gynaecology out-patient department. It can be benign or malignant. To arrive on a diagnosis, patient should be subjected to clinical examination and a variety of investigations. Management is tailored according to the diagnosis, age of the patient and the reproductive goal of the patient in future. Aim: To evaluate the proportion of benign and malignant aetiology in patients presented with adnexal mass and secondarily to correlate preoperative diagnosis with the histopathological diagnosis. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted, where patients with adnexal masse presented during one year were included. After work-up for all the patients, appropriate case based management was done. Clinical diagnosis of benign or malignant as pre-operative was co-related with histo-pathology and proportion of benign and malignant cases were noted. Results: Total 81 cases with the diagnosis of adnexal mass were included in the study. Mean age of presentation was 36.26 years. Most common presentation was pain in abdomen; 70 (86.4%) patients had benign masses, while 11 (13.6%) masses were malignant including two cases of borderline variety. Both patients underwent exploratory laparotomy with peritoneal lavage with total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with infracolicomentectomy. Conclusion: All Adnexal masses need to be evaluated clinically and radiologically. All investigations should aim at to differentiate benign and malignant masses. Preoperative diagnosis of benign or malignant mass is very important to plan optimum management of the case. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]