BackgroundMicroscopic examination of all surgical specimens is controversial.Case PresentationWe report two cases where examination has revealed unexpected results that have changed patient management and treatment.ConclusionsHistopathological examination of all tissue should be considered. The benefits and disadvantages of routine examination of tissue are discussed.

PRESENTATION OF CASE 60-year-old male patient, farmer by occupation, with no comorbidities presented with recurrent abdominal swelling of 4 years duration with history of pain in the swelling since previous 2-3 months. He was earlier operated for a swelling at the same site 7 years before in a hospital in a neighbouring small town. Neither the details of that procedure were available, nor it was known the specimen was sent for histopathological examination or not. He was apparently alright for 4 years when he started noticing a small swelling which was gradually increasing in size. Patient started having pain in the swelling since previous 2-3 months which was aggravated on bending and on exertion. There were no other constitutional symptoms like anorexia, weight loss or jaundice. On examination patient was thin built, lean, but otherwise general condition was good. There was no jaundice or anaemia. After local examination of the abdomen revealed a vertical paramedian operative scar in right lower quadrant of abdomen with a prominent 6*5 cm lump underneath the lower third of scar.