Literature DB >> 21816625

A web-based pilot study of inter-pathologist reproducibility using the ISHLT 2004 working formulation for biopsy diagnosis of cardiac allograft rejection: the European experience.

Annalisa Angelini1, Claus Boegelund Andersen, Giovanni Bartoloni, Fiona Black, Paul Bishop, Helen Doran, Marny Fedrigo, Jochen W U Fries, Martin Goddard, Heike Goebel, Desley Neil, Ornella Leone, Andrea Marzullo, Monika Ortmann, Francois Paraf, Samuel Rotman, Nesrin Turhan, Patrick Bruneval, Anna Chiara Frigo, Francesco Grigoletto, Alessio Gasparetto, Roberto Mencarelli, Gaetano Thiene, Margaret Burke.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess, at the European level and using digital technology, the inter-pathologist reproducibility of the ISHLT 2004 system and to compare it with the 1990 system We also assessed the reproducibility of the morphologic criteria for diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection detailed in the 2004 grading system.
METHODS: The hematoxylin-eosin-stained sections of 20 sets of endomyocardial biopsies were pre-selected and graded by two pathologists (A.A. and M.B.) and digitized using a telepathology digital pathology system (Aperio ImageScope System; for details refer to http://aperio.com/). Their diagnoses were considered the index diagnoses, which covered all grades of acute cellular rejection (ACR), early ischemic lesions, Quilty lesions, late ischemic lesions and (in the 2005 system) antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). Eighteen pathologists from 16 heart transplant centers in 7 European countries participated in the study. Inter-observer reproducibility was assessed using Fleiss's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha statistics.
RESULTS: The combined kappa value of all grades diagnosed by all 18 pathologists was 0.31 for the 1990 grading system and 0.39 for the 2005 grading system, with alpha statistics at 0.57 and 0.55, respectively. Kappa values by grade for 1990/2005, respectively, were: 0 = 0.52/0.51; 1A/1R = 0.24/0.36; 1B = 0.15; 2 = 0.13; 3A/2R = 0.29/0.29; 3B/3R = 0.13/0.23; and 4 = 0.18. For the 2 cases of AMR, 6 of 18 pathologists correctly suspected AMR on the hematoxylin-eosin slides, whereas, in each of 17 of the 18 AMR-negative cases a small percentage of pathologists (range 5% to 33%) overinterpreted the findings as suggestive for AMR.
CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility studies of cardiac biopsies by pathologists in different centers at the international level were feasible using digitized slides rather than conventional histology glass slides. There was a small improvement in interobserver agreement between pathologists of different European centers when moving from the 1990 ISHLT classification to the "new" 2005 ISHLT classification. Morphologic suspicion of AMR in the 2004 system on hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides only was poor, highlighting the need for better standardization of morphologic criteria for AMR. Ongoing educational programs are needed to ensure standardization of diagnosis of both acute cellular and antibody-mediated rejection. 2011 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21816625     DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2011.05.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant        ISSN: 1053-2498            Impact factor:   10.247


  16 in total

1.  Circulating donor-derived cell-free DNA: a true biomarker for cardiac allograft rejection?

Authors:  Kevin P Daly
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-03

Review 2.  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

Review 3.  Complications of Cardiac Transplantation.

Authors:  Luciano Potena; Andreas Zuckermann; Francesco Barberini; Arezu Aliabadi-Zuckermann
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  Multi-modal imaging of the pediatric heart transplant recipient.

Authors:  Jonathan H Soslow; Margaret M Samyn
Journal:  Transl Pediatr       Date:  2019-10

5.  Use of [18F]FDG Positron Emission Tomography to Monitor the Development of Cardiac Allograft Rejection.

Authors:  Kevin P Daly; Jason L J Dearling; Tatsuichiro Seto; Patricia Dunning; Frederic Fahey; Alan B Packard; David M Briscoe
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 4.939

6.  Deep learning-enabled assessment of cardiac allograft rejection from endomyocardial biopsies.

Authors:  Jana Lipkova; Tiffany Y Chen; Ming Y Lu; Richard J Chen; Maha Shady; Mane Williams; Jingwen Wang; Zahra Noor; Richard N Mitchell; Mehmet Turan; Gulfize Coskun; Funda Yilmaz; Derya Demir; Deniz Nart; Kayhan Basak; Nesrin Turhan; Selvinaz Ozkara; Yara Banz; Katja E Odening; Faisal Mahmood
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 87.241

7.  Utility of C4d immunostaining in the first year after pediatric and young adult heart transplantation.

Authors:  Ying Xu; Csaba Galambos; Miguel Reyes-Múgica; Susan A Miller; Adriana Zeevi; Steven A Webber; Brian Feingold
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 10.247

8.  Elevated ST2 Distinguishes Incidences of Pediatric Heart and Small Bowel Transplant Rejection.

Authors:  L R Mathews; J M Lott; K Isse; A Lesniak; D Landsittel; A J Demetris; Y Sun; D F Mercer; S A Webber; A Zeevi; R T Fischer; B Feingold; H R Turnquist
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 8.086

9.  An automated computational image analysis pipeline for histological grading of cardiac allograft rejection.

Authors:  Eliot G Peyster; Sara Arabyarmohammadi; Andrew Janowczyk; Sepideh Azarianpour-Esfahani; Miroslav Sekulic; Clarissa Cassol; Luke Blower; Anil Parwani; Priti Lal; Michael D Feldman; Kenneth B Margulies; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 35.855

10.  The history of pathology informatics: A global perspective.

Authors:  Seung Park; Anil V Parwani; Raymond D Aller; Lech Banach; Michael J Becich; Stephan Borkenfeld; Alexis B Carter; Bruce A Friedman; Marcial Garcia Rojo; Andrew Georgiou; Gian Kayser; Klaus Kayser; Michael Legg; Christopher Naugler; Takashi Sawai; Hal Weiner; Dennis Winsten; Liron Pantanowitz
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2013-05-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.