Objective: To investigate the association of the BRAFV600E mutation with papillary thyroid carcinoma using clinical, morphological andprognostic parameters. We also intend to assess the utility of the BRAFV600E immunohistochemistry and compare it with BRAF polymerasechain reaction (RT-PCR).Material and Method: We applied BRAFV600E immunohistochemistry in a cohort of 107 papillary carcinomas, 19 adenomas and 13 normalthyroid tissues that was chosen retrospectively between 2011 and 2015. Statistical analysis was based on semiquantitative immunohistochemistryfindings. We also applied BRAF RT-PCR in a subgroup of 14 papillary carcinomas, 13 metastatic lymph nodes and 4 adenomas that was chosenrandomly.Results: In regard to the comparison of BRAFV600E immunohistochemistry and BRAF RT-PCR, a 3+ nuclear and cytoplasmic immunoexpressionwas considered ‘positive’. The BRAFV600E mutation was most frequently observed in classic variant cases. No mutation was detected in follicularvariant cases. The mutational status of the primary tumour and the lymph node metastasis was consistent. A significant relationship of theBRAFV600E mutation was found with prognostic factors such as higher pT stage, classic variant, lymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, lowermitotic index, lack of tumour capsule, intrathyroidal spread and extrathyroidal extension.Conclusion: Immunohistochemistry, using the VE1 clone, is a reliable technique for detection of the BRAFV600E mutation. Our results withimmunohistochemistry are consistent with a previous effort. In our study, despite the correlation between some pathological prognosticparameters and the BRAFV600E mutation; poor prognosis was found to be irrelevant overall. Morphological parameters seem to be keener thanthe BRAFV600E mutation. Nevertheless, different series display different results, possibly due to environmental factors. Considering this and theproven success of targeted therapies against the BRAFV600E mutation a thorough assessment would be important.