The Limited Utility of Routine Pathologic Examination of Ganglion Cyst Excision From the Hand and Digits

Abstract

Background: It is routine practice at many institutions to send surgically excised ganglion cysts for pathologic analysis. This adds significant cost to the procedure with questionable benefit. The purpose of this study was to determine the necessity of routine pathologic examination of ganglion cysts excised from the hand. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 443 patients who underwent ganglion excision from the hand with routine pathologic examination between 2012 and 2022. The final pathologic diagnosis was compared with the treating surgeon’s clinical diagnosis, and the rates of concordant, discrepant, and discordant diagnoses were identified. Discrepant diagnoses were defined as differing clinical and pathologic diagnoses that did not change clinical management. Discordant diagnoses were defined as differing clinical and pathologic diagnoses that altered the treatment plan. Results: The prevalence of a concordant diagnosis was 96.2% (426 of 443; 95% confidence interval, 94.4%-98.0%). The prevalence of a discrepant diagnosis was 3.8% (17 of 443; 95% confidence interval, 2.1%-5.6%), and the prevalence of a discordant diagnosis was 0. The odds ratio was 0.04 for a discrepant diagnosis and 0 for a discordant diagnosis. Conclusions: Our study suggests abandoning routine pathologic analysis in patients undergoing ganglion cyst excision from the hand will not compromise quality of care when the surgeon is able to make a confident diagnosis. Discrepant diagnoses were rare and discordant diagnoses that did not occur. We recommend pathologic evaluation only when there is uncertainty in the clinical diagnosis.