Literature DB >> 20869750

Virtual microscopy: an evaluation of its validity and diagnostic performance in routine histologic diagnosis of skin tumors.

Patricia Switten Nielsen1, Jan Lindebjerg, Jan Rasmussen, Henrik Starklint, Marianne Waldstrøm, Bjarne Nielsen.   

Abstract

Digitization of histologic slides is associated with many advantages, and its use in routine diagnosis holds great promise. Nevertheless, few articles evaluate virtual microscopy in routine settings. This study is an evaluation of the validity and diagnostic performance of virtual microscopy in routine histologic diagnosis of skin tumors. Our aim is to investigate whether conventional microscopy of skin tumors can be replaced by virtual microscopy. Ninety-six skin tumors and skin-tumor-like changes were consecutively gathered over a 1-week period. Specimens were routinely processed, and digital slides were captured on Mirax Scan (Carl Zeiss MicroImaging, Göttingen, Germany). Four pathologists evaluated the 96 virtual slides and the associated 96 conventional slides twice with intermediate time intervals of at least 3 weeks. Virtual slides that caused difficulties were reevaluated to identify possible reasons for this. The accuracy was 89.2% for virtual microscopy and 92.7% for conventional microscopy. All κ coefficients expressed very good intra- and interobserver agreement. The sensitivities were 85.7% (78.0%-91.0%) and 92.0% (85.5%-95.7%) for virtual and conventional microscopy, respectively. The difference between the sensitivities was 6.3% (0.8%-12.6%). The subsequent reevaluation showed that virtual slides were as useful as conventional slides when rendering a diagnosis. Differences seen are presumed to be due to the pathologists' lack of experience using the virtual microscope. We conclude that it is feasible to make histologic diagnosis on the skin tumor types represented in this study using virtual microscopy after pathologists have completed a period of training. Larger studies should be conducted to verify whether virtual microscopy can replace conventional microscopy in routine practice.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20869750     DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2010.05.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Pathol        ISSN: 0046-8177            Impact factor:   3.466


  29 in total

Review 1.  The Empirical Foundations of Telepathology: Evidence of Feasibility and Intermediate Effects.

Authors:  Rashid L Bashshur; Elizabeth A Krupinski; Ronald S Weinstein; Matthew R Dunn; Noura Bashshur
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 3.536

2.  Validation of digital microscopy in the histopathological diagnoses of oral diseases.

Authors:  Anna Luíza Damaceno Araújo; Gleyson Kleber Amaral-Silva; Felipe Paiva Fonseca; Natália Rangel Palmier; Marcio Ajudarte Lopes; Paul M Speight; Oslei Paes de Almeida; Pablo Agustin Vargas; Alan Roger Santos-Silva
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  The performance of digital microscopy for primary diagnosis in human pathology: a systematic review.

Authors:  Anna Luíza Damaceno Araújo; Lady Paola Aristizábal Arboleda; Natalia Rangel Palmier; Jéssica Montenegro Fonsêca; Mariana de Pauli Paglioni; Wagner Gomes-Silva; Ana Carolina Prado Ribeiro; Thaís Bianca Brandão; Luciana Estevam Simonato; Paul M Speight; Felipe Paiva Fonseca; Marcio Ajudarte Lopes; Oslei Paes de Almeida; Pablo Agustin Vargas; Cristhian Camilo Madrid Troconis; Alan Roger Santos-Silva
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2019-01-26       Impact factor: 4.064

4.  Use of Digitally Stained Multimodal Confocal Mosaic Images to Screen for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer.

Authors:  Euphemia W Mu; Jesse M Lewin; Mary L Stevenson; Shane A Meehan; John A Carucci; Daniel S Gareau
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 10.282

5.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Virtual Pathology vs Traditional Microscopy in a Large Dermatopathology Study.

Authors:  Michael N Kent; Thomas G Olsen; Theresa A Feeser; Katherine C Tesno; John C Moad; Michael P Conroy; Mary Jo Kendrick; Sean R Stephenson; Michael R Murchland; Ayesha U Khan; Elizabeth A Peacock; Alexa Brumfiel; Michael A Bottomley
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 10.282

6.  A comparison of cervical histopathology variability using whole slide digitized images versus glass slides: experience with a statewide registry.

Authors:  Julia C Gage; Nancy Joste; Brigette M Ronnett; Mark Stoler; William C Hunt; Mark Schiffman; Cosette M Wheeler
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 7.  Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center.

Authors:  Liron Pantanowitz; John H Sinard; Walter H Henricks; Lisa A Fatheree; Alexis B Carter; Lydia Contis; Bruce A Beckwith; Andrew J Evans; Avtar Lal; Anil V Parwani
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 5.534

8.  Pathology Imaging Informatics for Clinical Practice and Investigative and Translational Research.

Authors:  Evita T Sadimin; David J Foran
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci (Boston)       Date:  2012-04

9.  Diagnosis of dysplasia in upper gastro-intestinal tract biopsies through digital microscopy.

Authors:  Dorina Gui; Galen Cortina; Bita Naini; Steve Hart; Garrett Gerney; David Dawson; Sarah Dry
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2012-08-25

10.  Development of a teledermatopathology consultation system using virtual slides.

Authors:  Ikunori Nakayama; Tsubasa Matsumura; Akihisa Kamataki; Miwa Uzuki; Kenji Saito; James Hobbs; Toshihide Akasaka; Takashi Sawai
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 2.644

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.