Raab Stephen S, Grzybicki Dana Marie, Janosky Janine E, Zarbo Richard J, Meier Frederick A, Jensen Chris, Geyer Stanley J
Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15232, USA.
Cancer. 2005 Nov 15;104(10):2205-13. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21431.
To the authors' knowledge, the frequency and clinical impact of errors in the anatomic pathology diagnosis of cancer have been poorly characterized to date.
The authors examined errors in patients who underwent anatomic pathology tests to determine the presence or absence of cancer or precancerous lesions in four hospitals. They analyzed 1 year of retrospective errors detected through a standardized cytologic-histologic correlation process (in which patient same-site cytologic and histologic specimens were compared). Medical record reviews were performed to determine patient outcomes. The authors also measured the institutional frequency, cause (i.e., pathologist interpretation or sampling), and clinical impact of diagnostic cancer errors.
The frequency of errors in cancer diagnosis was found to be dependent on the institution (P < 0.001) and ranged from 1.79-9.42% and from 4.87-11.8% of all correlated gynecologic and nongynecologic cases, respectively. A statistically significant association was found between institution and error cause (P < 0.001); the cause of errors resulting from pathologic misinterpretation ranged from 5.0-50.7% (the remainder were due to clinical sampling). A statistically significant association was found between institution and assignment of the clinical impact of error (P < 0.001); the aggregated data demonstrated that for gynecologic and nongynecologic errors, 45% and 39%, respectively, were associated with harm. The pairwise kappa statistic for interobserver agreement on cause of error ranged from 0.118-0.737.
Errors in cancer diagnosis are reported to occur in up to 11.8% of all reviewed cytologic-histologic specimen pairs. To the authors' knowledge, little agreement exists regarding whether pathology errors are secondary to misinterpretation or poor clinical sampling of tissues and whether pathology errors result in serious harm.
据作者所知,目前癌症解剖病理学诊断错误的频率及其临床影响尚未得到充分描述。
作者检查了接受解剖病理学检查以确定四家医院是否存在癌症或癌前病变的患者中的错误情况。他们分析了通过标准化的细胞学 - 组织学关联过程(比较患者同部位的细胞学和组织学标本)检测到的1年回顾性错误。进行病历审查以确定患者的预后。作者还测量了机构中癌症诊断错误的频率、原因(即病理学家的解读或采样)以及诊断性癌症错误的临床影响。
发现癌症诊断错误的频率因机构而异(P < 0.001),在所有相关妇科和非妇科病例中分别为1.79 - 9.42%和4.87 - 11.8%。发现机构与错误原因之间存在统计学上的显著关联(P < 0.001);病理误判导致的错误原因占比从5.0 - 50.7%不等(其余是由于临床采样)。发现机构与错误临床影响的分类之间存在统计学上的显著关联(P < 0.001);汇总数据表明,对于妇科和非妇科错误,分别有45%和39%与伤害相关。观察者间关于错误原因一致性的配对kappa统计量范围为0.118 - 0.737。
据报告,在所有审查的细胞学 - 组织学标本对中,高达11.8%存在癌症诊断错误。据作者所知,关于病理错误是继发于解读错误还是组织临床采样不佳,以及病理错误是否会导致严重伤害,目前几乎没有一致的看法。