Context.—
Specimen misidentification is the most significant error in laboratory medicine, potentially accounting for hundreds of millions of dollars in extra health care expenses and significant morbidity in patient populations in the United States alone. New technology allows the unequivocal documentation of specimen misidentification or contamination; however, the value of this technology currently depends on suspicion of the specimen integrity by a pathologist or other health care worker.
Objective.—
To test the hypothesis that there is a detectable incidence of unsuspected tissue specimen misidentification among cases submitted for routine surgical pathology examination.
Design.—
To test this hypothesis, we selected specimen pairs that were obtained at different times and/or different hospitals from the same patient, and compared their genotypes using standardized microsatellite markers used commonly for forensic human DNA comparison in order to identify unsuspected mismatches between the specimen pairs as a trial of “molecular auditing.” We preferentially selected gastrointestinal, prostate, and skin biopsies because we estimated that these types of specimens had the greatest potential for misidentification.
Results.—
Of 972 specimen pairs, 1 showed an unexpected discordant genotype profile, indicating that 1 of the 2 specimens was misidentified. To date, we are unable to identify the etiology of the discordance.
Conclusions.—
These results demonstrate that, indeed, there is a low level of unsuspected tissue specimen misidentification, even in an environment with careful adherence to stringent quality assurance practices. This study demonstrates that molecular auditing of random, routine biopsy specimens can identify occult misidentified specimens, and may function as a useful quality indicator.
Could Rapidly Mutating Y-STRs be a Potential Forensic Tool in Discriminating Lebanese Monozygotic Twins?
