Abstract
The level of accuracy of diagnosis in general histopathological practice appears to be high, although the number of published studies is few [1–3]. The clinically significant discrepancy rate between the original and reviewed or audited diagnoses in these studies varies from 0.26% to 1.2%, with the lower figure coming from a North American community hospital [3] and the higher levels from a British University Teaching Hospital [2]. The difference does not appear to reflect variations in case mix at the two institutions because the details given suggest that the errors were often the result of oversights by the reporting pathologist and that the interpretive errors were mainly common, rather than rare, problems.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Whitehead ME, Fitzwater JE, Lindley SK, Kern SB, Ulirsch RC, Winecoff WF. Quality assurance of histopathologic diagnoses; a prospective audit of three thousand cases. Am J Clin Pathol 81:487–491, 1994.
Ramsay AD, Gallagher PJ. Local audit of surgical Pathology. 18 months’ experience of peer review-based quality assessment in an English teaching hospital. Am J Surg Pathol 16:476–582, 1992.
Safrin RE, Bark CJ. Surgical pathology signout. Routine review of every case by a second pathologist. Am J Surg Pathol 17:1190–1192, 1993.
Prescott RJ, Wells S, Bisset DL, Banerjee SS, Harris M. Audit of tumour histopathology review by a regional oncology centre. J Clin Pathol 48:245–249, 1995.
Baker LH, Benjamin RS. Histologic frequency of disseminated soft tissue sarcomas in adults (abstr). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 19:324.
Presant CA, Russell WO, Alexander RW, Fu YS. Soft tissue and bone sarcoma histopathology peer review: The frequency of disagreement in diagnosis and the need for second pathology opinions. The South Eastern Cancer Study Group experience. J Clin Oncol 4:1658–1661, 1986.
Shiraki M, Enterline HT, Brooks JJ, Cooper NS, Hirsche S, Roth JA, Rao UN, Enzinger FM, Amato DA, Borden EC. Pathologic analysis fo advanced adult soft tissue sarcomas, bone sarcomas and mesotheliomas. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] experience. Cancer 64:484–490, 1989.
Alvegard TA, Berg NO. Histopathology peer review of high-grade soft tissue sarcoma: The Scandinavian Sarcoma Group experience. J Clin Oncol 7:1845–1852, 1989.
Harris M, Hartley AL, Blair V, Birch JM, Banerjee SS, Freemont AJ, McClure J, McWilliam LJ. Sarcomas in North West England: I Histopathological peer review. Br J Cancer 64:315–320, 1991.
Hartley AL, Blair V, Harris M, Birch JM, Banerjee SS, Freemont AJ, McClure J, McWilliam LJ. Sarcomas in North West England: II Incidence. Br J Cancer 64:1145–1150, 1991.
Weinstein RS. Telepathology comes of age in Norway. Hum Pathol 22:511–513, 1991.
Nordrum I, Engum B, Rinde E, Finseth A, Ericsson H, Kearney M, Stalsberg H, Eide TJ. Remote frozen section service: A telepathology project in Northern Norway. Hum Pathol 22:514–518, 1991.
Oberholzer M, Fischer H-R, Christen H, Gerber S, Bruhlmann M, Mihatsch M, Famos M, Winkler C, Fehr P, Bachthold L, Kayser K. Telepathology with an integrated services digital network — a new tool for image transfer in surgical pathology: A preliminary report. Hum Pathol 24:1078–1085, 1993.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Harris, M., Hartley, A.L. (1997). Value of peer review of pathology in soft tissue sarcomas. In: Verweij, J., Pinedo, H.M., Suit, H.D. (eds) Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Present Achievements and Future Prospects. Cancer Treatment and Research, vol 91. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6121-7_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6121-7_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7805-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-6121-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive