Literature DB >> 18841364

[Results of reference pathology in mammography screening].

H H Kreipe1, H Höfler, A Lebeau, H Pickartz, D Schmidt.   

Abstract

As a measure of quality assurance in mammography screening in Germany, obligatory double reading of histopathological specimens is currently a subject of debate. Concordance rates of more than 6000 cases gathered from several reference centres were evaluated. In accordance with several international studies, overall agreement in single and double readings in German mammography screening was approximately 95%. Concordance rates were even higher for malignancies (99%). Variations are more common in the case of lesions, the biological significance of which remains unclear (flat atypia, lobular neoplasm, papilloma). This is the result of a currently unresolvable methodological rather classification problem, as seen from studies from countries with many years of experience in training and diagnostic test series. Thus, the evidence base is currently insufficient to mandate double reading of slides.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18841364     DOI: 10.1007/s00292-008-1096-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathologe        ISSN: 0172-8113            Impact factor:   1.011


  4 in total

1.  Interobserver variability between general and expert pathologists during the histopathological assessment of large-core needle and open biopsies of non-palpable breast lesions.

Authors:  H M Verkooijen; J L Peterse; M E I Schipper; E Buskens; J H C L Hendriks; R M Pijnappel; P H M Peeters; I H M Borel Rinkes; W P Th M Mali; R Holland
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 9.162

2.  Diagnostic agreement in the evaluation of image-guided breast core needle biopsies: results from a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Laura C Collins; James L Connolly; David L Page; Robert A Goulart; Etta D Pisano; Laurie L Fajardo; Wendie A Berg; Daryl J Caudry; Barbara J McNeil; Stuart J Schnitt
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.394

3.  Impact of a national external quality assessment scheme for breast pathology in the UK.

Authors:  I O Ellis; D Coleman; C Wells; S Kodikara; E M Paish; S Moss; S Al-Sam; N Anderson; L Bobrow; I Buley; C E Connolly; N S Dallimore; S Hales; A Hanby; S Humphreys; F Knox; J Lowe; J Macartney; R Nash; D Parham; J Patnick; S E Pinder; C M Quinn; A J Robertson; J Shrimankar; R A Walker; R Winder
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists from 12 countries in diagnosing breast disease and reporting prognostic features of carcinomas. European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology.

Authors:  J P Sloane; I Amendoeira; N Apostolikas; J P Bellocq; S Bianchi; W Boecker; G Bussolati; D Coleman; C E Connolly; V Eusebi; C De Miguel; P Dervan; R Drijkoningen; C W Elston; D Faverly; A Gad; J Jacquemier; M Lacerda; J Martinez-Penuela; C Munt; J L Peterse; F Rank; M Sylvan; V Tsakraklides; B Zafrani
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.064

  4 in total
  1 in total

1.  Update 2010 of the German AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Early and Metastatic Breast Cancer - Chapter B: Prevention, Early Detection, Lifestyle, Premalignant Lesions, DCIS, Recurrent and Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Christoph Thomssen; Nadia Harbeck
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 2.860

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.