Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/61862
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Chumnan Kietpeerakool | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Bancha Changkasisri | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Surapan Khunamornpong | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Sumalee Siriaunkgul | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Jatupol Srisomboon | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-09-11T09:00:20Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-09-11T09:00:20Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2006-06-01 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 17437563 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 17437555 | en_US |
dc.identifier.other | 2-s2.0-33646399453 | en_US |
dc.identifier.other | 10.1111/j.1743-7563.2006.00053.x | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=33646399453&origin=inward | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/61862 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: To evaluate the impact of a pathology slide review on the management of gynecologic cancer patients. Materials and methods: Them edical records of referral patients, with the original pathologic diagnosis of gynecologic cancer treated at Chiang Mai University Hospital between January 2002 and May 2003, were retrospectively reviewed. Results: During the study period, 402 cases were available for analysis. The slides reviewed were obtained from the following organs: cervix (305), ovary (33), endometrium (32), vulva (14), and others (17). In comparison between the diagnosis after slide review and the original referral diagnosis, the minor discrepancy rate was 41.5% (95% CI: 36.7-46.5%). The major discrepancy rate was 9.0% (95% CI: 6.3-12.2%) and the most common clinical consequence was the modification of planned surgery. There was no major diagnostic discrepancy in the vulvar specimens. Among patients with cervical neoplasia, there was a significantly lower rate of major discrepancy among patients with gross lesion than among those without (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Major diagnostic discrepancies were identified in 9% of referral patients with gynecologic cancer. A pathology slide review is strongly recommended before planning treatment to improve the quality of patient care. © 2006 The Authors Journal Compilation © Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd. | en_US |
dc.subject | Medicine | en_US |
dc.title | Pathology slide review is mandatory before planning treatment for referral patients with gynecologic cancer | en_US |
dc.type | Journal | en_US |
article.title.sourcetitle | Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology | en_US |
article.volume | 2 | en_US |
article.stream.affiliations | Chiang Mai University | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | CMUL: Journal Articles |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.