Surgical pathology - Second reviews, institutional reviews, audits, and correlations: What's out there? Error or diagnostic variation?

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 130, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 620-625

  Frable, William J ^a,b  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER PATIENT; CONFERENCE PAPER; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; GLEASON SCORE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; MASS MEDIUM; MASTECTOMY; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER;

DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION;

EID: 33646680585     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Kohn LT, Corrigna JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.
2. Blendon RJ, DesRoches CM, Brodie M, et al. Views of practicing physicians and the public on medical errors. New Engl J Med. 2002;347:1933-1940.
3. Brennan TA. A broader concept of medical errors. New Engl J Med. 2002;347:1965-1967.
4. Parker-Pope T. Risk of error may justify second opinion on pathology reports. Wall Street Journal. April 13, 2001:1.
5. Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer. 1999;86:2426-2435.
6. Bachner P. CAP responds to ABC news segment on medical errors. CAP Today. May 14, 2001.
7. Epstein J, Jonathan Epstein MD. responds to comments on the ABC World News Tonight story on second opinions. CAP Today. May 20, 2001.
8. Titus K. No rights, no wrongs in second opinions. CAP Today. July 2001.
9. Parker-Pope T. Why it's hard to get a second opinion (and how to make sure you get one). Wall Street Journal. February 1, 2005:1.
10. Nguyen PL, Schultz D, Renshaw AA, et al. The impact of pathology review on treatment recommendations for patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Urol Oncol. 2004;22:295-299.
11. Staradub VL, Messenger KA, Hao N, Wiley EL, Morrow M. Changes in breast cancer therapy because of pathology second opinions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:982-987,
12. Hamady ZZ, Mather N, Lansdown MR, Davidson L, Maclennan KA. Surgical pathological second opinion in thyroid malignancy: impact on patients' management and prognosis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31:74-77.
13. Abt AB, Abt LG, Olt GJ. The effect of interinstitutional anatomic pathology consultation on patient care. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 1995;119:514-517.
14. Tsung JS. Institutional pathology consultations. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:399-402.
15. Safrin RE, Bark CJ. Surgical pathology sign-out routine review of every case bya second pathologist. Am J Surg Pathol. 1993;17:1190-1192.
16. Whitehead ME, Fitzwater JE, Lindley SK, Kern SB, Ulirsch RC, Winecoff WF 3rd. Quality assurance of histopathologic diagnoses: a prospective audit of three thousand cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1984;81:87-91.
17. Ramsay AD, Callagher PJ. Local audit of surgical pathology: 18 month's experience of peer review-based quality assessment in an English teaching hospital. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16:476-482.
18. Renshaw AA, Pinnar NE, Jiroutek MR, Young ML. Blinded review as a method for quality improvement in surgical pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126:961-963.
19. Lind AC, Bewtra C, Healy JC, Sims KL. Prospective peer review in surgical pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;104:560-566.
20. Trotter MJ, Bruecks AK. Interpretation of skin biopsies by general pathologists: diagnostic discrepancy rate measured by blinded review. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003;127:1489-1492.
21. Kronz JD, Milord R, Wilentz R, Weir EC, Schreiner SR, Epstein JL. Lesions missed on prostate biopsies in cases sent in for consultation. Prostate. 2003;54:310-314.
22. McGinnis KS, Lessin SR, Elder DE, et al. Pathology review of cases presenting to a multidisciplinary pigmented lesion clinic. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138:617-621.
23. Gilchrist KW, Kalish L, Gould VE, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of histopathological features in stage II breast cancer: an ECOG study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1985;5:3-10.
24. 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.
25. Hahm GK, NiemannTH, Lucas JG, Frankel WL. The value of second opinion in gastrointestinal and liver pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001;125:736-739.
26. Santoso JT, Coleman RL, Voet RL, Bernstein SG, Lifshitz S, Miller D. Pathology slide review in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91:730-734.
27. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 1991;15:209-221.
28. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavasosoli FA, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;15:1133-1143.
29. Rosen PP. Breast Pathology. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Raven; 1996:260-265.
30. Wiley EL, Keh P. Diagnostic discrepancies in breast specimens subjected to gross reexamination. Am J Surg Pathol. 1999;23:876-879.
31. Epstein JI. The diagnosis and reporting of adenocarcinoma of the prostate in core needle biopsy specimens. Cancer. 1996;78:350-356.
32. Carlson GD, Calvanese CB, Kahane H, Epstein JI. Accuracy of biopsy Gleason scores from a large uropathology laboratory: use of a diagnostic protocol to minimize observer variability. Urology. 1998;51:525-529.
33. Epstein JI, Yang XJ. Prostate Biopsy Interpretation. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002:155.
34. Kronz JD, Silberman MA, Allsbrook WC, Epstein JI. A web-based tutorial improves practicing pathologists' Gleason grading of images of prostate carcinoma specimens obtained by needle biopsy: validation of a new medical education paradigm. Cancer. 2000;89:1818-1823.
35. Renshaw AA, Schultz D, Cote K, Loffredo M, Ziemba DE, D'Amico AV. Accurate Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma in prostate needle biopsies by general pathologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:1007-1008.
36. Rosai J. Rosai and Ackerman's Surgical Pathology. 9th ed. New York, NY: Mosby; 2004:543.
37. Rosai J, Carcangiu ML, DeLellis RA. Tumors of the Thyroid Gland. Washington, DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology; 1992:62.
38. Atlas of Tumor Pathology; 3rd series, fascicle 5.
39. Foucar E. 'Individuality' in the specialty of surgical pathology: self-expression or just another source of diagnostic error? Am J Surg Pathol. 2000;24:1573-1576.
40. Leape LL. Error in medicine. JAMA. 1994;272:1851-1857.