Skin biopsy in general practice.

Abstract

and length of history (M Whitaker, personal communication). Some, albeit few, malignant lesions were not clinically recognised in this study and doctors should be wary of discarding skin specimens as malignant and incompletely excised lesions may recur. Referral for histological examination avoids delayed diagnosis and should effect prompt and adequate further treatment if required.In conclusion, the performance of skin biopsies by general practitioners could be improved. All skin specimens should be sent for histological examination for feedback of both diagnostic skill and quality of excision.

Is histological examination of tissue removed by general practitioners always necessary? Before and after comparison of detection rates of serious skin lesions

“…The broad geographical coverage and the high response rate suggest that the study practices were representative of practices throughout England that offer minor surgery; this is supported by the finding that the proportion of referred lesions that were malignant was closely similar to that found in other studies 6 7 8…”

“…Around 40% of lesions excised by general practitioners are not referred to a pathologist 3 4. Several researchers have reported diagnostic errors and incomplete excision of malignant lesions by general practitioners5 6 7 8 9 and have recommended mandatory pathological examination, a proposal supported by the Royal College of General Practitioners and other professional bodies 10…”

A retrospective biopsy study of the clinical diagnostic accuracy of common skin diseases by different specialties compared with dermatology

“…Several previous studies reported on the accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of dermatologists or nondermatologists, or both, using the histopathological diagnosis as the ''gold standard'' [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] with the number of cases ranging from 43 28 to 2935. 25 With 4451 analyzed skin specimens, the current study is to date the largest study of its kind.…”

Cirugía menor en un centro de Atención Primaria rural: 2 años de experiencia

“…La concordancia diagnóstica fue del 66%, cifra alta si comparamos con el 41-62% que se relaciona en la publicación de MCWilliam et al y aceptable comparada con la de Arribas et al [26][27][28][29] .…”