Literature DB >> 7890278

Diagnosis of malignant tumor: comparison between clinical and autopsy diagnoses.

V de Pangher Manzini1, M G Revignas, A Brollo.   

Abstract

A review was made of the results of 1,036 consecutive autopsies (average patient age, 75 years; 617 male and 419 female patients; autopsy rate, 40.2%) done at the Hospital of Monfalcone from January 1986 through December 1991. In 457 autopsies (44%) one or more malignant neoplasms were found (single tumor in 382, dual tumor in 69, and triple tumor in six) for a total of 538 tumors. In the corresponding death certificates the clinical diagnosis of malignancy was found in 302 autopsies for a total of 310 tumors (single in 294 and dual in eight). The number of clinically unrecognized malignancies was 228 (42%) and the number of patients with undiagnosed tumors was 155 (34%). The neoplasms were subdivided into four stages according to their extension at autopsy: stage 0 (85 tumors), microscopic neoplasm; stage I (146 tumors), neoplasm localized at the site of origin; stage II (43 tumors), local advanced neoplasm; and stage III (264 tumors), neoplasm with metastases. The rate of correct clinical diagnoses increased according to the level of stage; (stage 0, 1%; stage I, 40%; stage II, 58%; and stage III, 66%). The greatest numbers of tumors found at autopsy were located in the gastroenteric apparatus (170), the respiratory apparatus (149), and the urogenital apparatus (130). The number of clinically undiagnosed neoplasms was high with respect to the urogenital apparatus (77% overall and 51% excluding stage 0) and the gastroenteric apparatus (41% and 38% excluding stage 0); in contrast, the number was low for the respiratory apparatus (17%). The rate of correct diagnoses was higher in patients younger than 65 years (65%) than in those older than 65 (54%), but the difference was not significant. The duration of hospitalization in the 12 months before death was statistically higher (P < .001) in patients with a correct diagnosis (36 days) than in undiagnosed patients (14 days). Even taking into account the biases that affect selection of patients for autopsy, the notable discrepancy found between clinical and autopsy diagnoses underlines the fact that autopsy, despite improvements in diagnostic techniques, maintains its fundamental importance in assessing the reliability of clinical diagnoses and furthermore shows the underestimation of the incidence of tumors in epidemiological studies based solely on death certificates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7890278     DOI: 10.1016/0046-8177(95)90058-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Pathol        ISSN: 0046-8177            Impact factor:   3.466


  7 in total

1.  [Documentation of the diagnostic quality of hospitals: evaluation of autopsy reports].

Authors:  H Moch
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.011

2.  Missed diagnosis in hematological patients-an autopsy study.

Authors:  Ana Carolina Galtarossa Xavier; Sheila Aparecida Coelho Siqueira; Luciano José Megale Costa; Thais Mauad; Paulo Hilário Nascimento Saldiva
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2005-02-15       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Are coroners' necropsies necessary? A prospective study examining whether a "view and grant" system of death certification could be introduced into England and Wales.

Authors:  G N Rutty; R M Duerden; N Carter; J C Clark
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Application of conditional probability analysis to distant metastases from lung cancer.

Authors:  Akihiro Oikawa; Hideto Takahashi; Hiroichi Ishikawa; Koichi Kurishima; Katsunori Kagohashi; Hiroaki Satoh
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 2.967

5.  Are autopsies useful? Do premorbid findings predict postmortem results in head and neck cancer patients?

Authors:  C R Jennings; P J Bradley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Cluster analysis of deterioration sites after first-line epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor in epidermal growth factor receptor mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Shinichiro Okauchi; Kunihiko Miyazaki; Hiroaki Satoh
Journal:  Contemp Oncol (Pozn)       Date:  2022-06-30

7.  Clinico-pathological discrepancies in a general university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil.

Authors:  Fabiana Kotovicz; Thais Mauad; Paulo H N Saldiva
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.365

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.