Evidence-based diagnostiek van het bewegingsapparaat

Verhagen, Arianne P.; Alessie, Jeroen

doi:10.1007/978-90-368-2123-0

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We expect that after gaining more experience in WSI (the CT now has an experience of several years in CLM and only a few 100 cases for WSI), the concordance in WSI double readings also increases. From the results of the kappa calculations of Cohorts 1 and 2, it appeared that WSI has an effect on the reproducibility of CT compared to CLM at thresholds LSIL and ASC-US, probably due to the small number of ASC-US and LSIL cases in both cohorts[ 29 ] making kappa calculations less reliable. At the thresholds normal and HSIL with sufficient numbers of cases, kappa did not differ much in Cohort 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conventional Microscopical versus Digital Whole-Slide Imaging-Based Diagnosis of Thin-Layer Cervical Specimens: A Validation Study

Bongaerts

Clevers

Debets

et al. 2018

Journal of Pathology Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Whole-slide imaging (WSI) has been implemented in many areas of pathology, but primary diagnostics of cytological specimens are lagging behind. One of the objectives of viewing scanned whole-slide images from histological or cytological specimens is remote exchange of knowledge and expertise of professionals to increase diagnostic accuracy. We compared the scoring results of our team obtained in double readings of two different data sets: conventional light microscopy (CLM) versus CLM and CLM versus WSI. We hypothesized that WSI is noninferior to CLM for primary diagnostics of thin-layer cervical slides.Materials and Methods:First, we determined the concordance rate at different thresholds of the participating cytotechnicians by double reading with CLM of 500 thin-layer cervical slides (Cohort 1). Next, CLM was compared with WSI examination of another 505 thin-layer cervical slides (Cohort 2) scanned at ×20 in single focus plane. Finally, all major discordant cases of Cohort 1 were evaluated by an external expert in the field of gynecological cytology and of Cohort 2 in the weekly case meetings.Results:The overall concordance rate of Cohort 1 (CLM vs. CLM) was 97.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.0%–98.7%) and of Cohort 2 was 95.3% (95% CI: 93.0%–96.9%).Conclusion:Concordance rates of WSI versus CLM were comparable with those of CLM versus CLM. We have made a step forward paving the road to implementation of WSI also in routine diagnostic cytology.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%