Präparateverwechslungen: Ursachen, Auswirkung, Prävention

Banaschak, S.; Witting, Ch.; Brinkmann, B.

doi:10.1007/s002920050338

Cited by 5 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For forensic casework there is thus an urgent need for more stringent laboratory routines that avoid sample mixup ("Präparateverwechslung": Banaschak et al 1999) and for a new generation of reliable forensic databases. The mix-up/contamination rate as documented in publications should at least be two orders of magnitude smaller than what one has to reckon with presently (~0.2-2.0% per amplified fragment).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial recombination in forensic mtDNA population databases

Bandelt

Salas²,

Lutz-Bonengel

2004

Int J Legal Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial recombination of two or more mitochondrial DNA fragments from different samples would constitute a serious cause of error in forensic DNA typing, and yet one can demonstrate that such events have happened in the preparation of several published mtDNA databases. Focussed database searches, phylogenetic analysis, and network representations can highlight mosaic patterns and thus pinpoint sample mix-up. Therefore, we suggest that this approach should be applied to data prior to publication in order to uncover such errors in time.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial recombination in forensic mtDNA population databases

Bandelt

Salas²,

Lutz-Bonengel

2004

Int J Legal Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, when labeling tissue blocks by hand, the same number may accidentally be accorded twice, digits may be interchanged, or they may not be written clearly and may be misread later on. Automatic labeling of blocks or specimen slides in a printer prevents such mistakes (Figure 1) [4,20]. The incorrect transcription of data, such as name or date of birth of the patient or number of the biopsy specimen, can be prevented by bar codes.…”

Section: Computer-assisted Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If this is not done, and several files with adhesive labels carrying different names are deposited on the same desk, or unmarked bottles with biopsy specimens of different patients are kept in the same room, there is a great risk of confusion. Confusion may also be caused by labeling bottles and request forms prior to the biopsy because the course of action is often changed during the procedure, e.g., by performing an additional biopsy, by abstaining from a biopsy, or by changing the sequence of biopsies [20]. In such instances, empty bottles or request forms for biopsies that have not been performed are being posted, or the numbers or declarations of the biopsy site on bottles and request slips do not conform to one another.…”

Section: Ordermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The control of the correct, identical sequence of pathology numbers on slides, paraffin blocks, and request forms, and of the concordance of the shape of specimens in paraffin blocks and on slides, by at least two persons is essential (Figure 14). According to one study, the error rate could be reduced from 1% to 0.1% by reading out loud the numbers to another person [20]. …”

Section: Mutual Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Confusion—specimen mix-up in dermatopathology and measures to prevent and detect it

Weyers

2014

Dermatol Pract Concept

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintaining patient identity throughout the biopsy pathway is critical for the practice of dermatology and dermatopathology. From the biopsy procedure to the acquisition of the pathology report, a specimen may pass through the hands of more than twenty individuals in several workplaces. The risk of a mix-up is considerable and may account for more serious mistakes than diagnostic errors. To prevent specimen mix-up, work processes should be standardized and automated wherever possible, e.g., by strict order in the operating room and in the laboratory and by adoption of a bar code system to identify specimens and corresponding request forms. Mutual control of clinicians, technicians, histopathologists, and secretaries, both simultaneously and downstream, is essential to detect errors. The most vulnerable steps of the biopsy pathway, namely, labeling of specimens and request forms and accessioning of biopsy specimens in the laboratory, should be carried out by two persons simultaneously. In preceding work steps, clues must be provided that allow a mix-up to be detected later on, such as information about clinical diagnosis, biopsy technique, and biopsy site by the clinician, and a sketch of the specimen by the technician grossing it. Awareness of the danger of specimen mix-up is essential for preventing and detecting it. The awareness can be heightened by documentation of any error in the biopsy pathway. In case of suspicion, a mix-up of specimens from different patients can be confirmed by DNA analysis.

show abstract

“…B. bei einem Bruch der Probengefäße, sind denkbar. Potenzielle Fehlerquellen im pathologischen Institut sind die Vertauschung von Proben und Materialscheinen, Beschriftungsfehler, die Überdeckung der Beschriftung bei der Paraffineinbettung, die Kontamination bei gleichzeitiger Bearbeitung von mehr als einer Probe und die Überdeckung der Beschriftung bei der Paraffineinbettung [3]. Laut Schätzung des "College of American Pathologists" kommt es in etwa 0,6-2,9% der chirurgischen Proben zu einer Materialvertauschung [8].…”

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Vermeintliches Adenokarzinom des Samenstranges

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Malignant tumors of the spermatic cord are rare with primary neoplasms being mostly sarcomas. Adenocarcinomas of the spermatic cord are found extremely seldom and are predominantly metastases of extragonadal tumors. We present an asymptomatic 47-year-old patient who was referred to our clinic after a vasectomy had been performed and the histological examination had surprisingly shown adenocarcinoma of the left spermatic cord. Extensive laboratory analysis and diagnostic imaging did not demonstrate any testicular, spermatic cord, or extragonadal tumor. To exclude a mix-up of specimens, we performed DNA analysis. Microsatellite PCR clearly demonstrated the different origins of the tumor and the vasectomy specimen. Specimen mix-up or contamination may happen in any phase of surgical or pathological processing. In any case of clinical uncertainty concerning the identity of a tissue specimen, this possibility has to be taken into consideration. Microsatellite PCR can clearly identify the origin of tissue samples even on embedded material.

show abstract

Präparateverwechslungen: Ursachen, Auswirkung, Prävention

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Artificial recombination in forensic mtDNA population databases

Artificial recombination in forensic mtDNA population databases

Confusion—specimen mix-up in dermatopathology and measures to prevent and detect it

Vermeintliches Adenokarzinom des Samenstranges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About