Second opinion of anatomical pathology: A complex issue not easily reducedto matters of right and wrong

Purpose: We discuss the subject of a second opinion for interpretations of anatomical pathology from the perspective of patient care. Materials and Methods: We grouped 150 cases involving pathological review a t our institution into 3 categories depending on the effect on patient care . Results: Of 29 interpretive discrepancies 14 resulted in treatment changes but 7 of these 14 may have been interpreted differently by other practice g roups. Conclusions: Whether the second opinion represents an interpretive error or a legitimate difference of opinion, the result may affect patient care. Pa tients referred for treatment among practice groups should have pathologica l findings reviewed as part of a complete assessment by the new physicians.