Surgical Pathology Case Reviews Before Sign-Out: A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes Study of 45 Laboratories

2010 ◽  
Vol 134 (5) ◽  
pp. 740-743
Author(s):  
Raouf E. Nakhleh ◽  
Leonas G. Bekeris ◽  
Rhona J. Souers ◽  
Frederick A. Meier ◽  
Joseph A. Tworek

Abstract Context.—To avoid errors many surgical pathology services mandate review of a case by a second pathologist before reports are released (signed out). Objective.—To study the extent and characteristics of such review. Design.—Participants retrospectively examined up to 400 cases to identify a maximum of 30 cases reviewed by at least one additional pathologist before sign-out. For each case, participants documented the organ system, primary disease type, number of additional pathologists consulted, and the reason for case review. The main outcome measure was the fraction of surgical pathology cases that underwent second pathologist review before sign-out. Results.—From 45 laboratories, examination of 18 032 surgical pathology cases yielded 1183 (6.6%) cases that had been reviewed before sign-out. The median laboratory reviewed 8.2% of cases. Three-fifths of reviews focused on 4 organ systems: gastrointestinal (20.5%), breast (16.0%), skin (12.7%), and female genital tract (10.0%). Malignant neoplasm far exceeded all other categories of disease in reviewed cases (45.3%). Cases were reviewed by one additional pathologist 78% of the time. Two dominant reasons for case review emerged: difficult diagnosis (46.2%) and audit required by departmental policy (43.0%). Most laboratories (71%) had departmental policies regarding review of cases. These laboratories reviewed cases about 33% more often than laboratories without policies (9.6% versus 6.5%). Conclusions.—Review of selected surgical pathology cases before sign-out is widely accepted with 71% of participant laboratories following policies to this effect. About 1 case in 15 (6.6%) were reviewed with the median laboratory of participants reviewing about 1 in 12 (8.2%).

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-49
Author(s):  
M.I. Pakharukova ◽  
◽  
M.A. Kotugina ◽  
E.I. Vainberg ◽  
◽  
...  

Introduction. Vulvar cancer is a rare female genital tract tumor. Unfortunately, the final diagnosis is often made in the late stage despite the available visualization methods. It indicates the need to improve the early diagnosis methods. The aim of the study was to improve the efficiency of the cytological diagnosis of vulvar cancer and pre-cancerous lesions by comparing the cytological and histological findings and diagnoses and analyzing the differences. Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of the biopsies, smears, and scrapings of 82 patients from 2014 to 2019 was carried out. Results. We found that true positive conclusions were given in 75% of cases, false negative – in 25% (17 cases). False positive results (overdiagnosis) occurred in 3.6% of all cases compared. The sensitivity of the cytological method was 76.4%, its specificity – 70%. We discussed the possible causes of incorrect cytology conclusions. Conclusion. A retrospective analysis of the discrepancy between the cytological and the histological diag-noses allowed us to identify the microscopic features that resulted into incorrect conclusions and, thus, to increase the reliability of the cytological diagnosis Keywords: vulvar cancer, neoplasia, melanoma, Paget’s disease, vulvar cytology


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document