Utility of the PFA-100 as a screening test of platelet function: an audit of haemostasis laboratories in Australia and New Zealand.

The PFA-100 is a relatively new laboratory instrument, first described in 1995. There have since been numerous studies assessing its utility as a screening tool for platelet dysfunction and/or von Willebrand's disease (VWD). The PFA-100 displays variable sensitivity to different types of platelet disorders, as well as to antiplatelet medication (e.g. aspirin), with similar caveats for monitoring of primary haemostasis-promoting therapies in platelet dysfunction. There is therefore considerable uncertainty regarding its utility within this context, and we have accordingly performed an audit of usage among participants of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Program. Of 105 laboratories surveyed, 40 responded that they performed platelet function testing, with 26 (65%) further indicating they utilized the PFA-100. We report a wide variety of laboratory usage among these users, including numbers of tests performed [annual median (range) = 270 (15-6000)], sources of requests (clinical sources and localities), testing criteria and follow-up action. Most tests were completed within 4 h of collection, as recommended by the manufacturer, and most tests were performed as a replacement, or as a preliminary screen of platelet function (i.e. classical aggregation). Most abnormal findings, however, were attributed to antiplatelet medication such as aspirin.     

High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma without Palpable Lymphadenopathy: Is There a Therapeutic Role for Elective Neck Dissection?

PURPOSE: The beneficial role of elective neck dissection (END) in the management of high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) of the head and neck remains unproven. Some surgical specialists suggest that END may be beneficial for patients with clinically node-negative (N0) high-risk CSCC, but there are few data to support this claim. We reviewed the available literature regarding the use of END in the management of both CSCC and head and neck SCC (HNSCC). METHODOLOGY: The available medical literature pertaining to END in both CSCC and HNSCC was reviewed using PubMed and Ovid Medline searches. RESULTS: Many surgical specialists recommend that END be routinely performed in patients with N0 HNSCC when the risk of occult metastases is estimated to exceed 20%; however, patients who undergo END have no proven survival benefit over those who are initially staged as N0 and undergo therapeutic neck dissection (TND) after the development of apparent regional disease. There is a lack of data regarding the proper management of regional nodal basins in patients with N0 CSCC. In the absence of evidence-based data, the cutaneous surgeon must rely on clinical judgment to guide the management of patients with N0 high-risk CSCC of the head and neck. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate work-up for occult nodal disease may occasionally be warranted in patients with high-risk CSCC. END may play a role in only a very limited number of patients with high-risk CSCC.