ArticleInternational journal of surgery case reports2019
Genetic identification of endoscopic biopsies after unnecessary gastrectomy: Case report and medico-legal evaluation.
Article in International journal of surgery case reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tissue Displacement Versus Two Primary Colorectal Carcinomas? A Case Report on the Utility of Comparative Sequencing.JCO precision oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionForensic genetic laboratories analyse samples included in paraffin to verify the genetic correspondence of histological samples, from living subjects or cadavers, in cases where there is a suspicion of contamination of samples with tissues of other patients. PRESENTATION OF THE CASE: A case of a man subjected to a gastrectomy as a result of a histological diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma after endoscopic biopsies is reported. The microscopic analysis on the gastric tissue after the gastrectomy excluded the presence of cancer. Having suspected a diagnostic error, a microscopic revision of the biopsies was performed and confirmed the presence of cancer cells but led to a hypothesis that there had been contamination with foreign intestinal tissue. The genetic analysis performed on various pieces of tissue, despite the reduced amount of biological material, succeeded in identifying the presence of two incomplete genetic profiles, one of which belonged to a subject of the opposite sex. DISCUSSION: The case raised many questions about the process of setting up histological specimens. Even though it is impossible to identify the healthcare professionals responsible for contamination, the organizational error during the management of biopsies has significantly affected the clinical case of the patient, who underwent a gastrectomy for cancer that was not present.
conclusionThis case is not simply an example of diagnostic error and related unnecessary surgery, but it has raised some doubts about patient management and it has led us to some medical-legal cause for reflection in the field of professional liability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.