Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20071030 | Reporting Source: If the only patient record available for a physician office biopsy is the pathology report identified from a freestanding laboratory, is reporting source coded to 3 [Laboratory Only (hospital-affiliated or independent)] or 4 [Physicians office/Private Medical Practitioner (LMD)]? See Discussion. | A case was identified through a pathology report from a freestanding lab. The doctor who submitted the specimen left the state. His records cannot be located. Because the patient had the specimen removed at a physician's office, not at a path lab, is Type of Reporting Source field coded to the physicians office? | Reporting Source is the source that provided the best information used to abstract the case. For this case, assign code 3 [Laboratory Only (hospital-affiliated or independent)]. Reporting source should reflect the lab where this case was identified. The MD office added nothing to the case, not even a confirmation of malignancy. |
2007 |
|
|
20190056 | Behavior--Breast: What is the behavior of a solid papillary carcinoma when a pathologist does not indicate it in the pathology report and follow-up with the pathologist to obtain clarification regarding the behavior is not possible? See Discussion. |
Example: Mastectomy specimen final diagnosis shows two foci of invasive ductal carcinoma including: Invasive ductal carcinoma, no special type, in association with solid papillary carcinoma (tumor #1, 1 cm, slices 6 and 7) and invasive ductal carcinoma, no special type (tumor #2, 1.2 cm, slices 9 and 10). Summary Staging outlines, Tumor #1: Histologic Type: Invasive ductal carcinoma, no special type, in association with solid papillary carcinoma. As well as, Tumor #2: Histologic type: Invasive ductal carcinoma, no special type. Additional findings include ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): presently approximately 3.3 cm, spanning slices 10-13. The behavior of the solid papillary carcinoma component will affect the provisional histology of the first tumor (8523/3) per Rule H17 vs. 8500/3 per Rule H7). Based on the response, we can determine whether this represents a single or multiple primaries (single primary per M13 vs. multiple primaries per M14). |
Review all sections of the pathology report carefully for any mention of invasion, or lack of invasion, pertaining to the solid papillary carcinoma. Per WHO 4th Ed Breast: If there is uncertainty that there is invasion, these lesions should be regarded as in situ. The distinction between in situ and invasive disease in solid papillary carcinoma is difficult. |
2019 |
|
|
20200025 | Reportability/Ambiguous terminology--Bone: Is a case reportable when the imaging described a left first rib mass as ? See Discussion. |
The radiologist noted the mass was most compatible with a chondroid lesion, which is not reportable on its own, but can the subsequent term be used to accession this as reportable if only one malignant etiology is provided by the radiologist? Or does the statement imply that this is only one of several possible etiologies? |
Review this case with the involved physicians to determine their opinion on the bone mass. Review the plans for further evaluation and treatment (if any) to determine whether the physicians view this case as a chondroid lesion, chondrosarcoma, or something else. If it is not possible to obtain further information, do not report the case at this time. If further information becomes available, review the case again for reportability. |
2020 |
|
|
20180101 | Histology--Kidney: What is the histology code for renal cell clear cell of the kidney with subsequent epithelioid angiomyolipoma PEComa of the liver stated to be metastatic? Case originaly diagnosed in 2016. See discussion. |
This patient was diagnosed in 2016 with renal cell clear cell and was coded to that. In 2018, the patient's liver lesion was resected and pathology revealed epithelioid angiomyolipoma perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) (8714/3), a new term as of 2018. This was compared to the kidney slides and it was determined to be metastatic PEComa from the kidney. The physician's note states: The patient had a nephrectomy for a kidney tumor in 2016, excision of cutaneous melanomas, and resection of liver mass in 2018. These three cases were sent in consultation. The diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma was confirmed by a dermatopathologist of our department, (a separate report had been already issued). The kidney tumor is poorly differentiated composed of sheets of discohesive cells with markedly pleomorphic cells with frequent giant and bizarre cells. Most of the cells have abundant eosinophilic to clear cytoplasm. The nuclei are enlarged and pleomorphic. Multinucleated cells are numerous. Some cells have markedly enlarged nucleoli. Multifocal tumor necrosis is noted. Extensive lymphovascular invasion is observed. There are foci at the periphery of the tumor consisting of a proliferation of spindle cells with entrapped adipocytes consistent with minor element of unusual angiomyolipoma (see block A18). The liver tumor has histologic features that are similar to the poorly differentiated component of the kidney tumor. |
Revise the histology code for the 2016 diagnosis based on the review of slides performed in 2018. When new information becomes available, the information in the abstract can be updated. PEComa is a synonym for epithelioid angiomyolipoma (8860/1). These tumors can be malignant with local recurrence and or mets. For a pre-2018 diagnosis, code histology to 8860/3 using the ICD-O-3 Rule F, aka: Matrix principle. |
2018 |
|
|
20190074 | First course treatment/Scope of Reg LN Surgery--Breast: How is Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery coded when there is a sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNBx) and intra-mammary nodes removed for a single primary? See Discussion. |
Example: Operative report documents a left breast skin sparing mastectomy and sentinel node biopsy procedure. Pathology report lists left axillary sentinel nodes in specimen A) with 0/2 nodes positive, and left breast mastectomy without axilla in specimen B) yielding an additional 0/2 intramammary nodes positive. Would the Scope of Regional Node Surgery be coded as 2 (SLN biopsy) to capture the intent of the sentinel node procedure only, or 6 (code 2 + 4) to capture the actual type and number of nodes removed? SEER Coding and Staging Manual includes Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery instruction 4.b. which mentions assigning code 4 to intra-organ node removal. Similarly, there is instruction for coding SLN biopsy as code 2 and SLN biopsy with axillary dissection at the same time (code 6) or during separate procedures (code 7). However, it is not clear this combination code is how we should also capture an incidental intra-organ node removal. |
Revised answer 07/11/2023 Assign code 6, Sentinel node biopsy and code 3, 4, or 5 at same time or timing not noted. There were two sentinel lymph nodes removed (code 2) plus two intramammary nodes removed in a separate specimen from the mastectomy (code 4). Assign code 6 when nodes are removed from a sentinel lymph node procedure at the same time as removal of intra-organ lymph nodes which were not part of the sentinel lymph node procedure. |
2019 |
|
|
20140049 | Reportability--Brain and CNS: Is Tuberculum sellae meningioma reportable? Is it same as sphenoidale meningioma? Path: Brain tuberculum tumor resection: Meningioma, WHO grade I. |
Revised answer based on ST rules Yes, a Tuberculum sella meningioma is reportable if diagnosed 2004 or later. Code the primary site C700, cerebral meninges. It is a meningioma originating from the meninges of the Tuberculum sellae, which is part of the sphenoid bone. |
2014 | |
|
|
20160017 | Surgery of Primary Site--Melanoma: Please further explain the SEER Note under Melanoma surgery codes 30-36 for these two examples. Are both examples coded 31? 1. Shave bx: +melanoma in situ, +microscopic margins Wide excision: no residual melanoma in situ 2. Shave bx: melanoma, +microscopic margin Wide excision: Melanoma, margins negative (margin status negative but distance not stated) |
Revised answer: Assign surgery code 30 for both examples based on the SEER Note on the top of page 2 in the Surgery of Primary Site Codes for Skin: If it is stated to be a wide excision or reexcision, but the margins are unknown, code to 30. |
2016 | |
|
|
20150024 | Surgery of Primary Site--Breast: How should the Surgery of Primary Site field be coded when a patient has a lumpectomy and an additional margin excision during the same procedure? See discussion. |
Operative report indicates a wire localized lumpectomy was performed. The pathology report includes a final diagnosis for two specimens as follows: A) LEFT BREAST, EXCISION: INFILTRATING DUCTAL CARCINOMA B) LEFT BREAST, NEW DEEP MARGIN, EXCISION: BENIGN BREAST TISSUES AND BENIGN FIBROFATTY SOFT TISSUES; NO EVIDENCE OF NEOPLASIA. The definition for Breast surgery code 23 is "Reexcision of the biopsy site for gross or microscopic residual disease". There is no indication whether the re-excision has to be a separate procedure or can be during the same procedure as the excisional biopsy (lumpectomy). Some hospital registrars in our region believe code 22 is more appropriate. |
Revised Answer Assign code 22 when a patient has a lumpectomy and an additional margin excision during the same procedure. According to the CoC, "Re-excision of the margins intraoperatively during same surgical event does not require additional resources; it is still 22. Subsequent re-excision of lumpectomy margins during separate surgical event requires additional resources: anesthesia, op room, and surgical staff; it qualifies for code 23." |
2015 |
|
|
20081059 | Reportability/Histology--Head and Neck: Is a right cerebellopontine (CP) angle endolymphatic sac papillary tumor (ELST) reportable? If so, what is the histology code? |
Revised December 2015
ELST is reportable. Code histology to adenocarcinoma (8140/3). Code primary site to inner ear (C301).
Endolymphatic sac tumors are rare non-metastasizing adenocarcinomas that originate in the endolymphatic sac of the inner ear (C301). They are slow growing and widely invade, and in later stages often destroy, the petrous bone. The WHO Classification assigns ICD-O-3 code 8140/3. |
2008 | |
|
|
20100107 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Kidney, renal pelvis: How is histology coded for a tumor described as "renal cell carcinoma, clear cell with rhabdoid features"? See Discussion. | Is the statement "with __ features" indicative of a specific type of renal cell carcinoma (that is not represented by a specific histology code) or a second histologic type? Per ICD-O, "malignant rhabdoid tumor" is coded 8963/3. "Rhabdoid" is not listed in Table 1 in the MP/H rules as a specific type of renal cell carcinoma. |
Rhabdoid features occur in about 5% of all renal cell cancers and indicate a more aggressive tumor. Per WHO, these tumors comprise approximately 2% of all pediatric tumors with a median diagnosis age of 1-2 years old. This diagnosis is highly suspect in patients over age 3. Most previously reported rhabdoid tumors over age 5 have subsequently proven to be renal medullary carcinomas.
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, if the patient in this case is a child, apply Kidney Rule H7 and code histology to 8963/3 [malignant rhaboid tumor]. Otherwise, we strongly suggest you consult with the pathologist to determine if this is truly a rhabdoid rather than a medullary tumor. |
2010 |
An official website of the United States government
