Identification of surgical biopsy borders by use of india ink.

Abstract

Separation of surgical biopsy borders from artifactual borders created during trimming of biopsy specimens is necessary to avoid misinterpretation of histologic borders. Misinterpretation of a contaminated trimming border as a surgical border may lead to additional surgery and excessive removal of normal tissue. Likewise, a neoplasm may regrow locally or metastasize if a surgical border infiltrated with neoplastic cells is falsely assumed to be an artifactual trimming border. The use of India ink for distinguishing between surgical biopsy borders and artifactual borders was evaluated. Ten normal tissue specimens from 8 types of tissue (skin, small intestine, urinary bladder, bone, muscle, lung, large intestine, and uterus) were obtained from freshly euthanatized dogs. The specimens were painted with India ink and examined for adherence of the ink to the cut surface of the specimen. Adherence of the ink was observed in all specimens with the exception of the cut surface of the lung. Twenty-five biopsy specimens from dogs with clinical cases of disease were similarly painted with India ink and evaluated. Twenty-two were identified as neoplastic and 3 as inflammatory lesions. Wedges of tissue were obtained from the center of the biopsy specimens to purposely create borders that contained neoplastic tissue. These positive controls were painted with India ink to evaluate the effect of the ink on the histologic appearance of the neoplastic cells. Distortion or alteration of the cellular architecture was not observed in any of the normal specimens, specimens from dogs with clinical cases, or positive controls. The use of India ink for delineation of biopsy borders is a simple technique that presents few technical difficulties.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)