This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clark, C. R.
Right arrow Articles by Bauer, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Clark, C. R.
Right arrow Articles by Bauer, T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 82:1529 (2000)
© 2000 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

Editorial

Routine Pathological Examination of Operative Specimens from Primary Total Hip and Total Knee Replacement: Another Look

Charles R. Clark, M.D. and Thomas Bauer, M.D., Ph.D.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Department of Pathology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio

This issue of The Journal contains two important articles related to the topic of routine pathological examination of operative specimens from patients undergoing total hip or total knee arthroplasty for the treatment of osteoarthritis. As pointed out in the article by Kocher et al., many surgeons believe that routine pathological examination of specimens removed at surgery is mandatory4. However, regulations by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations note that the clinical staff, in consultation with the pathologist, may make an exception to mandatory submission of tissue when certain conditions are met3. These conditions include (1) the quality of care is not compromised by the exemption, (2) another suitable means of verification of removal has been used, and (3) there is an authenticated operative note or other official report that documents tissue removal.

Kocher et al. analyzed a total of 1234 specimens removed at the time of . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JBJSHome page
S. H. Palmer, M. S. Kocher, G. Erens, T. S. Thornhill, and J. E. Ready
Routine Pathological Examination of Surgical Specimens from Patients Undergoing Total Hip and Knee Replacement
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2002; 84(6): 1082 - 1084.
[Full Text] [PDF]