Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-04.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
Second Opinion Diagnoses of Cytologic Specimens on Consultation : Asan Medical Center Experience.
Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

J Pathol Transl Med : Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Articles

Page Path
HOME > J Pathol Transl Med > Volume 19(2); 2008 > Article
Original Article Second Opinion Diagnoses of Cytologic Specimens on Consultation : Asan Medical Center Experience.
Sohyung Park, Jae Y Ro, Kyung Ja Cho, Gyungyub Gong, Yong Mee Cho, Shin Kwang Khang
Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine 2008;19(2):99-106
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3338/kjc.2008.19.2.99
Department of Pathology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. skkhang@amc.seoul.kr
  • 1,927 Views
  • 11 Download
  • 0 Crossref
  • 0 Scopus

BACKGROUND
Second opinion diagnosis of outside pathology slides is a common practice for efficient and proper patient management. We analyzed cytology slides from outside hospitals submitted for a second opinion diagnosis to determine whether the second opinion diagnosis had any influence on patient care.
METHODS
We reviewed 1,153 outside cytology slides referred to Asan Medical Center for second opinions from January, 2007, to December, 2007. All cases were categorized into three groups; no diagnostic discrepancy, minor diagnostic discrepancies (no impact on the management), and major diagnostic discrepancies (significant impact on the management and subsequent follow-up).
RESULTS
The thyroid was the most common organ system (933 cases, 80.9%). Forty cases (3.6%) belonged to the major diagnostic discrepancy group and 149 cases (12.8%) to the minor discrepancy group. For validation of second opinion diagnoses in major discrepancy cases, subsequent biopsy or surgical resection specimens and clinical information were reviewed, which were available in 29 cases. The second opinion diagnoses resulted in alteration of clinical management in 21 of 29 cases.
CONCLUSION
For all referred patients, second opinion diagnosis is important and mandatory for appropriate patient care.

Related articles

J Pathol Transl Med : Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine