Audit of tumour histopathology reviewed by a regional oncology centre
AIMS--To analyse the diagnostic differences in reporting tumour histopathology between a district general hospital and a regional oncology centre. METHODS--Tumour histopathology reports (n = 227) extracted from Bolton General Hospital files between 1988 and 1992 were compared with the corresponding...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of clinical pathology Vol. 48; no. 3; pp. 245 - 249 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Association of Clinical Pathologists
01.03.1995
BMJ BMJ Publishing Group LTD |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | AIMS--To analyse the diagnostic differences in reporting tumour histopathology between a district general hospital and a regional oncology centre. METHODS--Tumour histopathology reports (n = 227) extracted from Bolton General Hospital files between 1988 and 1992 were compared with the corresponding Christie Hospital (oncology centre) reports, the same material having been seen at both hospitals. RESULTS--Diagnostic agreement existed in 77% of all cases. The incidence of major discrepancies was 8.37%. Of the diagnoses, 19 (36%) cases involved major discrepancies and 34 (64%) cases minor discrepancies. Most discrepancies occurred in the lymphoma group and involved subclassification of Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ki1 anaplastic large cell lymphoma and T cell rich B cell lymphoma were problematic diagnoses. The correct grading of follicle centre cell lymphomas using the Kiel classification was another problem area. In 19 cases certain aspects of immunohistochemistry produced discrepancies. In one case an incorrect diagnosis was made at the oncology centre and in another both centres gave an incorrect diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS--Areas of diagnostic difficulty mainly involve the subclassification of lymphomas. Review of tumour pathology by experts is recommended, at least in certain categories, to ensure correct diagnosis and uniformity in subclassification of tumours. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | PMID:7730487 istex:AEBAEDC0792E4A18C51A30F2C53A28CCF55C5E78 Related-article-href:7560189 related-article-ID:N0x8f701c0.0x8f668c8 local:jclinpath;48/3/245 href:jclinpath-48-245.pdf ark:/67375/NVC-F6ZV67X7-8 ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0021-9746 1472-4146 |
DOI: | 10.1136/jcp.48.3.245 |