Recently in switching errors Category

In July 2010, Fox 4 News in Dallas reported on a medical mix-up that nearly led to an unnecessary double mastectomy for one Texas woman. Romona Champion had a routine mammogram in February of 2009 that showed a suspicious mass. She had a biopsy done three weeks later and soon found out the biopsy revealed she had breast cancer. 

She delayed her scheduled surgery in order to take a long-planned family vacation. Two days before the trip, she found out there was a mistake in her diagnosis and that she was cancer-free. The pathology lab had mislabeled her specimen container with the name of another woman who did have breast cancer. The mix-up was only discovered because the other woman's doctor was concerned that his patient, who had all the signs of breast cancer, was reported to be cancer-free.  

While the outcome could have been far worse, both women were still negatively affected by Specimen Provenance Complications (SPC). SPCs are a by-product of the complicated biopsy evaluation process and may arise due to instances of specimen transposition, foreign cell contamination, and patient misidentification that occur in clinical or anatomical pathology. The first woman (Romona Champion) had to deal with the belief that she had breast cancer and the second experienced a delay in treatment.

Launched in the summer of 2010, the know error® system for breast biopsies brings new levels of safety and accuracy to the biopsy evaluation process. Through the use of DNA Specimen Provenance Assignment (DSPA) and bar code technology, this innovative system dramatically reduces the incidence of Specimen Provenance Complications (SPC) enhancing patient safety and diagnostic accuracy. By performing DNA testing of biopsy tissue samples PRIOR to any treatment taking place, the know error® system virtually eliminates any adverse patient outcomes due to SPC.

For more information about the know error® system for breast biopsies, please visit our website www.knowerror.com.

On July 20, 2010, a story in The Vancouver Sun revealed a case where an accidental biopsy mix up resulted in an unnecessary lumpectomy for one woman and a 10 week delay in treatment for another.

As with similar cases documented in this blog, the mix up was discovered by a pathologist performing routine post-surgical tests that revealed no cancer in the patient's tissue samples.  The report states, "...DNA tests confirmed on July 16 that the woman's initial biopsy...was accidentally switched with a similar biopsy from another woman."  This type of mix up is just one of many types of Specimen Provenance Complications (SPC) that can lead to diagnostic mistakes.  Other examples of SPC are specimen transposition and foreign cell contamination. 

Launched in the summer of 2010, the know error® system for breast biopsies brings new levels of safety and accuracy to the biopsy evaluation process.  Through the use of DNA Specimen Provenance Assignment (DSPA) and bar code technology, this innovative system dramatically reduces the incidence of SPC so that diagnostic mistakes are minimized. 

While the DNA tests in this case confirmed the mix up, this was unfortunately AFTER the unnecessary surgery and delay in treatment.  The know error® system performs DSPA of biopsy tissue samples PRIOR to any treatment taking place and virtually eliminates diagnostic mistakes due to SPC.  This allows both patient and physician to proceed confidently with treatment options based on the patient's biopsy results.

For more information about the know error® system for breast biopsies, please visit our website www.knowerror.com.

On February 23, 2010, The College of American Pathologists posted an article on its web site titled, "When a Rose Is Not a Rose."  The article discusses the problem of mislabeled specimens and the procedural improvements that can be made to prevent labeling errors.

The article explains that "...reporting a wrong result can have potentially devastating effects on the patient. This can be doubly true if there is a patient identification mix-up: one patient could receive the wrong medical or surgical treatment while another doesn't get the treatment he or she needs. Either situation can result in severe, irreversible consequences."  As a remedy to the various types of labeling errors it covers, the article offers several procedural improvements such as reviewing definitions, guidelines and the protocol for what to do when an error is detected. 

In December 2009, a report out of Obrezje, Slovenia revealed a lab mix up that resulted in the unnecessary complete stomach removal of a healthy woman, 50-year old Anica Kavecic.  Kavecic had no history of gastric problems, but when a biopsy showed a pervasive cancer in her stomach, she was urged to have an immediate and total gastrectomy. 

The diagnosis stunned both Kavecic and her family physician but the biggest shock came after the surgery when routine post surgical tests revealed her stomach was cancer-free.  Her biopsy tissue samples had been switched with those of another patient, who in fact did have stomach cancer, resulting in the removal of her perfectly healthy stomach.   

On August 12, 2009, an article published in The Korea Times revealed that two of Korea's top hospitals had been held liable in the case of a cancer-free woman, referred to as "Kim," who mistakenly had part of her right breast removed. In 2005, a tumor was found in Kim's right breast during a routine check-up. She had an ultrasound and biopsy to further examine the tumor; however, as the tests were being evaluated, the hospital mistakenly switched her chart with that of another patient. Based on the another patient's chart, she was diagnosed with cancer and it was recommended that she have part of her right breast removed. Upon seeking a second opinion, some simple tests were performed, but there was no second biopsy and the cancer diagnosis was confirmed based on the switched biopsy results.  

In May 2009, media reports surfaced about a 28 year old man who mistakenly underwent a radical mastectomy only to find out a few months later that he never had cancer.  Scott Aprile, a personal trainer from New York, received the devastating news that he had breast cancer in December of 2008. Just one month later, in January 2009, surgeons removed his right breast along with three lymph nodes. About two weeks after his surgery, Aprile was told that his biopsy had been switched with a woman's biopsy that had been performed the same day.

A recent blog post discussing second opinions focused on a theoretical patient who was misdiagnosed with cancer and was not helped by a second opinion since it was based on the original biopsy which had been mistakenly switched with another patient's biopsy results.  This happened in the case of Darrie Eason, a 35-year old single mother who mistakenly had both breasts removed after a lab mix-up led to her cancer misdiagnosis.  When appearing on Good Morning America and asked what could be learned from this, Eason, who herself sought a second opinion, responded "Maybe it's that second opinions are good but second biopsies are better."