“The petals and thorns” of ROSE (rapid on-site evaluation)

Authors

  • Gilda da Cunha Santos MD, PhD,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    2. Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    • Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth St, 11th Floor, Eaton Wing, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C4 Canada

    Search for more papers by this author
    • Fax: (416) 340-5517

  • Hyang-Mi Ko MD, PhD,

    1. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    2. Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Mauro Ajaj Saieg MD, PhD,

    1. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    2. Department of Pathology, Santa Casa Medical School, Sao Paulo, Brazil
    Search for more papers by this author
  • William R. Geddie MD

    1. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    2. Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

In this article, the authors discuss the advantages (“petals”) and disadvantages (“thorns”) of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) performed for minimally invasive procedures such as computed tomography (CT)-guided and endoscopic-guided fine-needle aspiration with a focus on deep-seated lymph nodes. One of the main advantages is increased diagnostic accuracy. Disadvantages include the need for highly trained professionals and a lack of adequate reimbursement.

Ancillary