The role of second opinion pathology in the management of lesions of the head and neck

Current Opinion in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 81-84

  Kronz, Joseph D ^a   Westra, William H ^b,c  

^a Mercy Medical Center   (United States)

^b DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Cytopathology; Head and neck; Medical error; Second opinion; Surgical pathology

Indexed keywords

CHEMOTHERAPY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; HEAD AND NECK INJURY; MANDATORY TESTING; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION PROCESSING; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; RISK MANAGEMENT; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; THYROID GLAND;

HEAD AND NECK NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; THYROID NEOPLASMS;

EID: 15244353577     PISSN: 10689508     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.moo.0000156162.20789.66     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.
2. Landrigan CP, Rothschild JM, Cronin JW, et al. Effect of reducing interns' work hours on serious medical errors in intensive care units. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:1838-1848.
3. Glabman M. The top ten malpractice claims (and how to minimize them). Hosp Health Netw 2004; 78:60-66. This article illuminates the most common causes of malpractice claims. Although it does not directly address the role of second opinion pathology, it does draw attention to diagnostic error as a common but preventable cause of patient harm and, in turn, litigation.
4. Chen AY, Callender D, Mansyur C, et al. The impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery: the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Experience. Arch Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg 2000; 126:322-326.
5. Abt AB, Abt LG, Olt GJ. The effect of interinstitution anatomic pathology consultation on patient care. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1995; 119:514-517.
6. Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer 1999; 86:2426-2435.
7. Tsung JS. Institutional pathology consultation. Am J Surg Pathol 2004; 28:399-402. This 1-year retrospective study assesses the frequency of discordant diagnosis after second opinion pathology slide review. Although this is a general surgical pathology study, discrepancy rates are listed as a function of anatomic site, including the head and neck.
8. Layfield LJ, Jones C, Rowe L, et al. Institutional review of outside cytology materials: a retrospective analysis of two institutions' experiences. Diagn Cytopathol 2002; 26:45-48.
9. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Sanfilippo F. Clinical and cost impact of second-opinion pathology: review of prostate biopsies prior to radical prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20:851-857.
10. Aldape K, Simmons ML, Davis RL, et al. Discrepancies in diagnoses of neuroepithelial neoplasms: the San Francisco Bay Area Adult Glioma Study. Cancer 2000; 88:2342-2349.
11. Scott CB, Nelson JS, Farnan NC, et al. Central pathology review in clinical trials for patients with malignant glioma: a report of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 83-02. Cancer 1995; 76:307-313.
12. Bruner JM, Inouye L, Fuller GN, et al. Diagnostic discrepancies and their clinical impact in a neuropathology referral practice. Cancer 1997; 79:796-803.
13. Selman AE, Niemann TH, Fowler JM, et al. Quality assurance of second opinion pathology in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94:302-306.
14. Santoso JT, Coleman RL, Voet RL, et al. Pathology slide review in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91:730-734.
15. Jacques SM, Qureshi F, Munkarah A, et al. Interinstitutional surgical pathology review in gynecologic oncology: I. Cancer in endometrial curettings and biopsies. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1998; 17:36-41.
16. Harris M, Hartley AL, Blair V, et al. Sarcomas in north west England: I. Histopathological peer review. Br J Cancer 1991; 64:315-320.
17. Hahm GK, Niemann TH, Lucas JG, et al. The value of second opinion in gastrointestinal and liver pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001; 125:736-739.
18. Westra WH, Kronz JD, Eisele DW. The impact of second opinion surgical pathology on the practice of head and neck surgery: a decade experience at a large referral hospital. Head Neck 2002; 24:684-693.
19. Baloch ZW, Hendreen S, Gupta PK, et al. Interinstitutional review of thyroid fine-needle aspirations: impact on clinical management of thyroid nodules. Diagn Cytopathol 2001; 25:231-234.
20. Vivino FB, Gala I, Hermann GA. Change in final diagnosis on second evaluation of labial minor salivary gland biopsies. J Rheumatol 2002; 29:938-944.
21. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology: Consultations in surgical pathology. Am J Surg Pathol 1993; 17:743-745.
22. Horowitz JM. Discordant diagnosis. Time 1999; 154:117.
23. Gupta D, Layfield LJ. Prevalence of inter-institutional anatomic pathology slide review: a survey of current practice. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24:280-284.