Abstract: TH-PO560
Survey of Utility of Renal Pathology Society-Sponsored Existing Classifications
Session Information
- Pathology and Lab Medicine
November 03, 2022 | Location: Exhibit Hall, Orange County Convention Center‚ West Building
Abstract Time: 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM
Category: Pathology and Lab Medicine
- 1700 Pathology and Lab Medicine
Authors
- Setty, Suman, University of Illinois Chicago UI Health, Chicago, Illinois, United States
- Akilesh, Shreeram, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, United States
- Afrouzian, Marjan, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, Texas, United States
- Nickeleit, Volker, University of North Carolina System, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
- Gaut, Joseph, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, United States
Group or Team Name
- Research and Scientific Committee, Renal Pathology Society
Background
The Renal Pathology Society with an international membership has sponsored many classifications over the years. We revisit these classifications with the intent to examine their impact on pathology practice and impressions of their relevance to patient care.
Methods
A survey was constructed and released to the renal pathologist community on March 12, 2022. The survey closed on April 21, 2022 with 266 respondents. Of these 247 completed surveys were analyzed.
Results
Forty % of respondents practice solely renal pathology and 60% in part. Of the 60%, 65% (102/157) practice at least 25% renal pathology.
Of the 259 respondents, 132 (51%) were from North America, 62 (24%) from Asia, 48 (19%) Europe, 10 (4%) South America, <2% from Australia and <1% from Africa.
Survey responses are summarized in Table 1.
Between 15 and 30% of the pathologists who report the classifications as written, use a synoptic version.
Also, of those surveyed, 169/198 (85%) find templates to be useful for their reporting purposes.
Conclusion
We surveyed members for their impression of Renal Pathology Society -Sponsored classifications of renal diseases. Responses were received from mainly N. America, Europe and Asia of whom the majority have a substantial renal pathology practice. A majority of those surveyed were familiar with all the publications and use the recommended definitions and terminology as outlined in the publication or use most of the descriptive elements in their reports. The principal reason for not using classifications is the belief that they do not have clinical utility or that clinicians do not use information derived from the classifications e. g. 31% for IgA nephropathy vs 91% for diabetic nephropathy. Also, at best 30% of the pathologists who report the classification as written, use a synoptic version.