Surgical tissue samples submitted for pathology evaluation were severely over-processed by the tissue processor instrument.The subsequent glass microscopic slides produced were inadequate for rendering a pathologic diagnosis.Tissue from a bladder tumor resection from pt (b)(6) was processed overnight on the 6 hour processing protocol run in retort b on the leica peloris ii tissue processor instrument.Upon subsequent slide production, the tissue samples were found to be excessively dry and brittle and the histologists were unable to section a satisfactory rep section of the sample.Dry, broken sections of tissue (from microtomy) were placed on the microscopic slides and stained by h&e method.Upon review of the slides by the pathologist, she deemed that the sample was undiagnosable.Notations of the tissue processing problem/artifact were noted in the pathology report and an internal rca was filed.The pathologist forwarded the slides to another healthcare facility for secondary review and a consult diagnosis was issued, again with the tissue processing problem/artifact noted in that pathology report.Although a diagnosis was rendered, the disclaimer noted by the facility pathologist and consulting pathologist indicate the difficulty in confirming the diagnosis.The need for extended review by the facility pathologist, as well as the need for consultation due to the tissue processing deficiency delayed the reporting of pathology results which did delay treatment for the pt.An internal review of the leica peloris ii tissue processor instrument's error codes and processing run data did not indicate an obvious malfunction.However, problem with dry, brittle tissue samples and over-processing have been reported to the mfr since the purchase of the instrument and most recently on various dates from (b)(6) 2017.
|