53
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology : A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study)

      research-article
        , MD * , , MD, PhD , , MSc , , MD, MS § , , MD , , MD , , MBChB, MPH , , MD # , , MBChB, DPhil, FRCPath , , MD , , MD, PhD ** , , MD , , MSc , , MD § , , MD § , , MD, PhD , , MD , , MD , , MD , , MD, PhD , , MSc , , MD * , , MD * , , MD * , , MD, PhD * , , MD § , , MD § , , MD, PhD , , MD * , , DO § , , MD , , MD § , , MD, PhD , , MD, PhD †† ,
      The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
      Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc
      whole slide imaging, microscopy, surgical pathology, digital imaging, pathology, primary diagnosis, noninferiority trial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Most prior studies of primary diagnosis in surgical pathology using whole slide imaging (WSI) versus microscopy have focused on specific organ systems or included relatively few cases. The objective of this study was to demonstrate that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. A blinded randomized noninferiority study was conducted across the entire range of surgical pathology cases (biopsies and resections, including hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry, and special stains) from 4 institutions using the original sign-out diagnosis (baseline diagnosis) as the reference standard. Cases were scanned, converted to WSI and randomized. Sixteen pathologists interpreted cases by microscopy or WSI, followed by a wash-out period of ≥4 weeks, after which cases were read by the same observers using the other modality. Major discordances were identified by an adjudication panel, and the differences between major discordance rates for both microscopy (against the reference standard) and WSI (against the reference standard) were calculated. A total of 1992 cases were included, resulting in 15,925 reads. The major discordance rate with the reference standard diagnosis was 4.9% for WSI and 4.6% for microscopy. The difference between major discordance rates for microscopy and WSI was 0.4% (95% confidence interval, −0.30% to 1.01%). The difference in major discordance rates for WSI and microscopy was highest in endocrine pathology (1.8%), neoplastic kidney pathology (1.5%), urinary bladder pathology (1.3%), and gynecologic pathology (1.2%). Detailed analysis of these cases revealed no instances where interpretation by WSI was consistently inaccurate compared with microscopy for multiple observers. We conclude that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology, including biopsies and resections stained with hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry and special stains. This conclusion is valid across a wide variety of organ systems and specimen types.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center.

          There is increasing interest in using whole slide imaging (WSI) for diagnostic purposes (primary and/or consultation). An important consideration is whether WSI can safely replace conventional light microscopy as the method by which pathologists review histologic sections, cytology slides, and/or hematology slides to render diagnoses. Validation of WSI is crucial to ensure that diagnostic performance based on digitized slides is at least equivalent to that of glass slides and light microscopy. Currently, there are no standard guidelines regarding validation of WSI for diagnostic use. To recommend validation requirements for WSI systems to be used for diagnostic purposes. The College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center convened a nonvendor panel from North America with expertise in digital pathology to develop these validation recommendations. A literature review was performed in which 767 international publications that met search term requirements were identified. Studies outside the scope of this effort and those related solely to technical elements, education, and image analysis were excluded. A total of 27 publications were graded and underwent data extraction for evidence evaluation. Recommendations were derived from the strength of evidence determined from 23 of these published studies, open comment feedback, and expert panel consensus. Twelve guideline statements were established to help pathology laboratories validate their own WSI systems intended for clinical use. Validation of the entire WSI system, involving pathologists trained to use the system, should be performed in a manner that emulates the laboratory's actual clinical environment. It is recommended that such a validation study include at least 60 routine cases per application, comparing intraobserver diagnostic concordance between digitized and glass slides viewed at least 2 weeks apart. It is important that the validation process confirm that all material present on a glass slide to be scanned is included in the digital image. Validation should demonstrate that the WSI system under review produces acceptable digital slides for diagnostic interpretation. The intention of validating WSI systems is to permit the clinical use of this technology in a manner that does not compromise patient care.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validation of digital pathology imaging for primary histopathological diagnosis

            Digital pathology (DP) offers advantages over glass slide microscopy (GS), but data demonstrating a statistically valid equivalent (i.e. non-inferior) performance of DP against GS are required to permit its use in diagnosis. The aim of this study is to provide evidence of non-inferiority.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Use of whole slide imaging in surgical pathology quality assurance: design and pilot validation studies.

              By imaging large numbers of slides automatically at high resolution, modem automated whole slide imaging (WSI) systems have the potential to become useful tools in pathology practice. This article describes a pilot validation study for use of automated high-speed WSI systems for surgical pathology quality assurance (QA). This was a retrospective comparative study in which 24 full genitourinary cases (including 47 surgical parts and 391 slides) were independently reviewed with traditional microscopy and whole slide digital images. Approximately half the cases had neoplasia in the diagnostic line. At the end of the study, diagnostic discrepancies were evaluated by a pathology consensus committee. The study pathologists felt that the traditional and WSI methods were comparable for case review. They reported no difference in perceived case complexity or diagnostic confidence between the methods. There were 4 clinically insignificant discrepancies with the signed-out cases: 2 from glass slide and 2 with WSI review. Of the 2 discrepancies reported by the WSI method, the committee agreed with the reviewer once and the original report once. At the end of the study, the participants agreed that automated WSI is a viable potential modality for surgical pathology QA, especially in multifacility health systems that would like to establish interfacility QA. The participants felt that major issues limiting the implementation of WSI-based QA did not involve image acquisition or quality but rather image management issues such as the pathologist's interface, the hospital's network, and integration with the laboratory information system.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Am J Surg Pathol
                Am. J. Surg. Pathol
                PAS
                The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
                Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc
                0147-5185
                1532-0979
                January 2018
                28 September 2017
                : 42
                : 1
                : 39-52
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of Pathology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
                []Department of Pathology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
                []Philips Digital Pathology Solutions, Best, The Netherlands
                [§ ]Miraca Life Sciences, Irving, TX
                []Advanced Pathology Associates, Silver Spring, MD
                []Department of Pathology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
                [# ]Department of Pathology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IA
                [** ]Department of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco
                [†† ]Department of Pathology, Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Clive R. Taylor, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California, Pathology, HMR 311, Los Angeles, CA 90033 (e-mail: clive.taylor@ 123456med.usc.edu ).
                Article
                00006
                10.1097/PAS.0000000000000948
                5737464
                28961557
                1029684f-8686-48c5-a48d-0fa4a1a8a15a
                Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                Categories
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                whole slide imaging,microscopy,surgical pathology,digital imaging,pathology,primary diagnosis,noninferiority trial

                Comments

                Comment on this article