Importance of a second opiniojn in breast surgical pathology and therapeutic implications;Importância da segunda opinião em patologia cirúrgica mamária e suas implicações terapêuticas

Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetricia

Volumn 30, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 602-608

  De Almeidasalles, Måcio ^a   Sanches, Fernanda Squarcio Fernandes ^a,b   Perez, Amanda Arantes ^a   Gobbi, Helence ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

^b Clentitica do Conselho Nacionalde Desenvolvimento Clentitico e Tecnológico CNPq   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Beast diagnosis Referral and consultation; Breast Pathology Breast neoplasms Diagnosis Carcinoma; Ductal

Indexed keywords

EID: 61349180066     PISSN: 01007203     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Consultations in surgical pathology. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Am J Surg Pathol, 1993;17(7):743-5.
2. Cook IS, McCormick D, Poller DN. Referrals for second opinion in surgical pathology: implications for management of cancer patients in the UK. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27(6):589-94.
3. 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(10):982-7.
4. Raab SS, Nakhleh RE, Ruby SG. Patient safety in anatomic pathology: measuring discrepancy frequencies and causes. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129(4):459-66.
5. Cooper K. Errors and error rates in surgical pathology: an Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology survey. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130(5):607-9.
6. Raab SS, Grzybicki DM. Measuring quality in anatomic pathology. Clin Lab Med. 2008;28(2);245-59.
7. Trovers H. Quality assurance indicators in anatomic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1990;114(11): 1149-56.
8. Molina L, Dalben I, De Luca LA. Análise das oportunidades de diagnóstico precoce para as neoplasias malignas de mama. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2003;49(2):185-90,
9. Oliveira AB, De Luca LA, Carvalho GT, Arias VEA, Carvalho LR, Assunção MC. Imunoexpressão do c-erbB-2 nas lesões epiteliais proliferativas intraductais da mama de mulheres. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2004;50(3):324-9.
10. Joslyn SA. Ductal carcinoma in situ: trends in geographic, temporal, and demographic patterns of care and survival. Breast J. 2006;12(1):20-7,
11. Hofvind S, Sorum R, Thoresen S. Incidence and tumor characteristics of breast cancer diagnosed before and after implementation of a population-based screening-program. Acta Oncol. 2008;47(2):225-31.
12. Trufelli DC, Miranda VC, Santos MBB, Fraile NMP, Pecoroni PG, Gonzaga SFR, et al. Analise do atraso no diagnóstico e tratamento do câncer de mama em urn hospital público. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2008;54(1):72-6.
13. Page DL, Anderson TJ. Diagnostic histopathology of the breast. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1987.
14. Ellis IO, Elston CW, Poller DN. Ductal carcinoma in situ. In: Elston CW, Ellis IO, editors. The breast. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1998. p. 249-82.
15. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 1991;15(3):209-21.
16. Bianchi S, Palli D, Galli M, Arisio B, Cappa A, Dal Forno S, et al. Reproducibility of histological diagnoses and diagnostic accuracy of non palpable breast lesions. Pathol Res Pract. 1994;190(1):69-76.
17. Salles MA, Matias MARF, Resende LMP, Gobbi H. Variação interobservador no diagnóstico histopatológico do carcinoma ductal in situ da mama. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2005;27(1):1-6.
18. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA, Fechner RE, Kempson RL, Gelman R, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16(12): 1133-43.
19. Wells WA, Carney PA, Eliassen MS, Tosteson AN, Greenberg ER. Statewide study of diagnostic agreement in breast pathology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(2): 142-5.
20. Scott MA, Lagios MD, Axelsson K, Rogers LW, Anderson TJ, Page DL. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: reproducibility of histological subtype analysis. Hum Pathol. 1997;28(8):967-73.
21. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991;19(5):403-10.
22. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-74.
23. Tomaszewski JE, Bear HD, Connolly JA, Epstein Jl, Feldman M, Foucar K, et al. Consensus conference on second opinions in diagnostic anatomic pathology. Who, what, and when. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114(3):329-35.
24. Allison KH, Reed SD, Voigt LF, Jordan CD, Newton KM, Garcia RL. Diagnosing endometrial hyperplasia: why is it so difficult to agree? Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(5):691-8.
25. Rakovitch E, Mihai A, Pignol JP, Hanna W, Kwinter J, Chartier C, et al. Is expert breast pathology assessment necessary for the management of ductal carcinoma in situ? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2004;87(3):265-72.
26. O'Sullivan MJ, Morrow M. Ductal carcinoma in situ - current management. Surg Clin North Am. 2007;87(2):333-51.
27. Salles MA, Matias MARF, Scares PCM, Resende LMP, Gobb H. Abordagem atual do carcinoma ductal in situ da mama. Femina. 2007;35(1): 19-27.
28. Page DL. Special types of invasive breast cancer, with clinical implications. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003;27(6):832-5.
29. Page DL, Jensen RA, Simpson JF. Routinely available indicators of prognosis in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1998;51 (3): 195-208.
30. Longacre TA, Ennis M, Quenneville LA, Bane AL, Bleiweiss U, Carter BA, et al. Interobserver agreement and reproducibility in classification of invasive breast carcinoma: an NCI breast cancer family registry study. Mod Pathol. 2006; 19(2): 195-207.