Comparing virtual with conventional microscopy for the consensus diagnosis of Barrett’s neoplasia in the AspECT Barrett’s chemoprevention trial pathology audit

Sanders, D. S. A.; Grabsch, Heike; Harrison, Rebecca; Bateman, A C; Going, James J.; Goldin, Robert; Mapstone, Nicholas P.; Novelli, Marco; Walker, M M; Jankowski, Janusz

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2012.04288.x

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Diagnostic accuracy of VM for GI tract neoplasia was compared with that for CLM in a U.K. study (comparative analysis, n = 61). 106 Here again, ''.there was substantial reliability of diagnostic agreement (j = 0.712) scoring the 61 biopsies and moderate agreement scoring the subgroup of 33 positive biopsies with both conventional microscopy (j = 0.598) and virtual microscopy (j = 0.436). Interobserver diagnostic agreement between two pathologists by virtual microscopy was substantial (j = 0.76).…”

Section: Telepathology Evidence: Feasibility and Acceptancementioning

confidence: 90%

The Empirical Foundations of Telepathology: Evidence of Feasibility and Intermediate Effects

Bashshur

Krupiński

Weinstein

et al. 2017

Telemedicine and e-Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evidence regarding feasibility/acceptance of telepathology and related information technology applications has been well documented for several decades. The majority of evidentiary studies focused on intermediate outcomes, as indicated by comparability between telepathology and conventional light microscopy. A consistent trend of concordance between the two modalities was observed in terms of diagnostic accuracy and reliability. Additional benefits include use of telepathology and whole slide imaging for teaching, research, and outreach to resource-limited countries. Challenges still exist, however, in terms of use of telepathology as an effective diagnostic modality in clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Telepathology Evidence: Feasibility and Acceptancementioning

confidence: 90%

The Empirical Foundations of Telepathology: Evidence of Feasibility and Intermediate Effects

Bashshur

Krupiński

Weinstein

et al. 2017

Telemedicine and e-Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…* The PCR for studies on the gastrointestinal system ranged from 70.0% to 99%. 29,31,43,53,55,57,59 Table 3 displays the PCRs for each organ system included.…”

Section: Diagnostic Concordancementioning

confidence: 99%

The Diagnostic Concordance of Whole Slide Imaging and Light Microscopy: A Systematic Review

Goacher¹,

Randell²,

Williams³

et al. 2016

Archives of Pathology &Amp; Laboratory Medicine

143

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Thirty-eight studies were included in the review. The mean diagnostic concordance of WSI and LM, weighted by the number of cases per study, was 92.4%. The weighted mean κ coefficient between WSI and LM was 0.75, signifying substantial agreement. Of the 30 studies quoting percentage concordance, 18 (60%) showed a concordance of 90% or greater, of which 10 (33%) showed a concordance of 95% or greater. This review found evidence to support a high level of diagnostic concordance. However, there were few studies, many were small, and they varied in quality, suggesting that further validation studies are still needed.

show abstract

“…10 Several studies in recent years have demonstrated that primary histopathologic diagnoses can be rendered digitally using WSI. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Discrepancies in diagnoses between digital and glass slides in publications were attributed to image quality, rarely missed tissue on the digital image, inadequate clinical metadata, and pathologists' lack of experience using the WSI system. Specific microscopic details (eg, organisms, nuclear atypia, apoptosis, mitotic figures, eosinophil granules) were sometimes noted to be difficult to identify because of poor image resolution on high magnification or went undetected (eg, minute focus of prostate adenocarcinoma) in the digital image.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validating Whole Slide Imaging for Diagnostic Purposes in Pathology: Guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center

Pantanowitz

Sinard

Henricks

et al. 2013

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine

500

495

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context.-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.Objective.-To recommend validation requirements for WSI systems to be used for diagnostic purposes.Design.-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.Results.-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.Conclusions.-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.

show abstract

Comparing virtual with conventional microscopy for the consensus diagnosis of Barrett’s neoplasia in the AspECT Barrett’s chemoprevention trial pathology audit

Abstract: Diagnostic agreement with virtual microscopy compares favourably with conventional microscopy in what is recognized to be a challenging area of diagnostic practice. However, this study highlights possible limitations for this method in the primary diagnostic setting.

Cited by 22 publications

References 16 publications

The Empirical Foundations of Telepathology: Evidence of Feasibility and Intermediate Effects

The Empirical Foundations of Telepathology: Evidence of Feasibility and Intermediate Effects

The Diagnostic Concordance of Whole Slide Imaging and Light Microscopy: A Systematic Review

Validating Whole Slide Imaging for Diagnostic Purposes in Pathology: Guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About