Management of second opinions in pathology: Recommendations of the Spanish Society of Anatomical Pathology (SEAP). Second opinions in pathology

Abstract

Introduction

As diagnostic complexity in pathology increases, mainly in cancer diagnoses, the demand for second opinions from specialized and highly qualified centres also increases. There is a certain lack of uniformity in the criteria for carrying out these consultations, managing the material under review, and the responses from the consultant centre.

Material and methods

In order to establish recommendations on the aspects to be considered both by the pathologist or referring centre and by the pathologist or consultant centre, a group of experts from the Spanish Society of Anatomical Pathology conducted a literature review of guidelines and recommendations from other societies and relevant published articles. Based on this review, consensus criteria have been established.

Results

Recommendations are provided on how second opinions in pathology should be managed by both the referring and consultant pathologists, including aspects of material submission and funding.

Conclusion

Second opinions should be carried out following standardized guidelines for both the referring and consultant pathologists, covering referral, management of discrepancies, and funding to ensure a consistent system.