Review Article| Volume 25, ISSUE 4, P777-785, December 2005

Download started.


Medical-Legal Issues Associated with Breast Fine Needle Aspiration Biopsy

      Accountability for the medical practice of pathology may be found in several forums. Health care facilities often conduct quality assurance audits encouraging the discussion of methods of practice that may lend themselves to improvement. Departmental meeting and formal “tumor board” or multidisciplinary conferences offer feedback and context for cytologic and histologic diagnoses that have been rendered. Outside formal peer review programs are available.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.

      Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.


      Subscribe to Clinics in Laboratory Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Physician Insurers Association of America
        Breast cancer study.
        Physician Insurers Association of America, Washington (DC)1990
        • Physician Insurers Association of America
        Breast cancer study.
        Physician Insurers Association of America, Rockville (MD)1995
        • Physicians Insurers Association of America
        Breast cancer study.
        Physician Insurers Association of America, Rockville (MD)2002
        • Lagios M.D.
        The contribution of pathology to breast cancer malpractice.
        Seminars in Breast Disease. 1998; 1: 15-22
        • Brenner R.J.
        Breast cancer and malpractice: a guide to the clinician.
        Seminars in Breast Disease. 1998; 1: 3-14
      1. Skettington v Bradley, 366 Mich 552; 115 NW 2d 393 (1962).

      2. Francisco parchment Medical Clinic, 88 Mich App 583, 272 NW 2d 736, 1978, modified 407 Mich 325, 1979.

      3. Mahanna v Hirsch, 191 Cal App 3d 1520, 237 Cal Rptr 140 (1987).

        • Brenner R.J.
        • Bassett L.W.
        • Fajardo L.
        • et al.
        Stereotactic core breast biopsy: a multiinstitutional prospective trial.
        Radiology. 2001; 218: 866-872
        • Ely K.
        • Carter B.
        • Page D.
        • et al.
        Core breast biopsy of the breast with atypical ductal hyperplasia: probabilistic approach to reporting.
        Mod Pathol. 2000; 13: 21A
        • Cohen M.A.
        Cancer upgrades at excisional biopsy after diagnosis of atypical lobular hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ at core-needle biopsy: some reasons why.
        Radiology. 2004; 231: 617-621
        • Sapino A.
        • Frigerio A.
        • Peterse J.L.
        • et al.
        Mammographically detected in situ lobular carcinoma of the breast.
        Virshows Arch. 2000; 436: 421-430
        • Georgian-Smith D.
        • Lawton T.J.
        Calcifications of lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: radiologic-pathologic correlation.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 176: 1255-1259
      4. Phillips v Good Samariton Hospital, 416 NE 2d 646 (Ohio, 1979).

        • Foster M.C.
        • Helvie M.A.
        • Gregory Ne
        • et al.
        Lobular carcinoma in situ or atypical lobular hyperplasia at core-needle biopsy: is excisional biopsy necessary.
        Radiology. 2004; 231: 813-819
        • Schnitt S.J.
        • Connolly J.L.
        • Tavassoli F.A.
        • et al.
        Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria.
        Am J Surg Path. 1992; 16: 1133-1143
        • Troxel D.B.
        Error in surgical pathology.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 2004; 28j: 1092-1095