Diagnostic surgical pathology: The importance of second opinion in a developing country

Objective: To review the cases sent to the section of histopathology, Aga Khan Universty (AKU) for second opinion and see whether there are significant differences in the original outside diagnosis and the subsequent diagnosis submitted by us. Methods: A retrospective study of all consecutive cases for second opinion in the form of paraffin blocks from 1st Novemver 2001 to 31st July 2002. The primary submitted diagnosis in each case was compared with the subsequent AKU diagnosis. Results: The study included a total of 381 cases. However, in 45 cases (11.81%), initial histopathological diagnosis was not provided. Out of the remaining 336 cases, there were differences between the original diagnosis and the subsequent AKU diagnosis in 120 cases (35.71%). Out of these 120 cases, immunohistochemistry was performed in 65 cases (54.16%) only. Conclusion: In a developing country like Pakistan, where few laboratories are equipped to function as modern histopathology units, second opinion on difficult cases is very important. Worldwide, the concept of second opinion in surgical pathology is well established.