AIM: To train and individually validate a group of breast pathologists in specialty-specific digital primary diagnosis by using a novel protocol endorsed by the Royal College of Pathologists' new guideline for digital pathology. The protocol allows early exposure to live digital reporting, in a risk-mitigated environment, and focuses on patient safety and professional development. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three specialty breast pathologists completed training in the use of a digital microscopy system, and were exposed to a training set of 20 challenging cases, designed to help them identify personal digital diagnostic pitfalls. Following this, the three pathologists viewed a total of 694 live, entire breast cases. All primary diagnoses were made on digital slides, with immediate glass slide review and reconciliation before final case sign-out. There was complete clinical concordance between the glass and digital impression of the case in 98.8% of cases. Only 1.2% of cases had a clinically significant difference in diagnosis/prognosis on glass and digital slide reads. All pathologists elected to continue using the digital microscope as the standard for breast histopathology specimens, with deferral to glass for a limited number of clinical/histological scenarios as a safety net. CONCLUSION: Individual training and validation for digital primary diagnosis allows pathologists to develop competence and confidence in their digital diagnostic skills, and aids safe and responsible transition from the light microscope to the digital microscope.
AIM: To train and individually validate a group of breast pathologists in specialty-specific digital primary diagnosis by using a novel protocol endorsed by the Royal College of Pathologists' new guideline for digital pathology. The protocol allows early exposure to live digital reporting, in a risk-mitigated environment, and focuses on patient safety and professional development. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three specialty breast pathologists completed training in the use of a digital microscopy system, and were exposed to a training set of 20 challenging cases, designed to help them identify personal digital diagnostic pitfalls. Following this, the three pathologists viewed a total of 694 live, entire breast cases. All primary diagnoses were made on digital slides, with immediate glass slide review and reconciliation before final case sign-out. There was complete clinical concordance between the glass and digital impression of the case in 98.8% of cases. Only 1.2% of cases had a clinically significant difference in diagnosis/prognosis on glass and digital slide reads. All pathologists elected to continue using the digital microscope as the standard for breast histopathology specimens, with deferral to glass for a limited number of clinical/histological scenarios as a safety net. CONCLUSION: Individual training and validation for digital primary diagnosis allows pathologists to develop competence and confidence in their digital diagnostic skills, and aids safe and responsible transition from the light microscope to the digital microscope.
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
Authors: C Ryan Oliver; Megan A Altemus; Trisha M Westerhof; Hannah Cheriyan; Xu Cheng; Michelle Dziubinski; Zhifen Wu; Joel Yates; Aki Morikawa; Jason Heth; Maria G Castro; Brendan M Leung; Shuichi Takayama; Sofia D Merajver Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Anna Luíza Damaceno Araújo; Gleyson Kleber do Amaral-Silva; Maria Eduarda Pérez-de-Oliveira; Karen Patricia Domínguez Gallagher; Cinthia Veronica Bardalez López de Cáceres; Ana Luiza Oliveira Corrêa Roza; Amanda Almeida Leite; Bruno Augusto Linhares Almeida Mariz; Carla Isabelly Rodrigues-Fernandes; Felipe Paiva Fonseca; Marcio Ajudarte Lopes; Paul M Speight; Syed Ali Khurram; Jacks Jorge Júnior; Manoela Domingues Martins; Oslei Paes de Almeida; Alan Roger Santos-Silva; Pablo Agustin Vargas Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2021-03-13 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Bih-Rong Wei; Charles H Halsey; Shelley B Hoover; Munish Puri; Howard H Yang; Brandon D Gallas; Maxwell P Lee; Weijie Chen; Amy C Durham; Jennifer E Dwyer; Melissa D Sánchez; Ryan P Traslavina; Chad Frank; Charles Bradley; Lawrence D McGill; D Glen Esplin; Paula A Schaffer; Sarah D Cramer; L Tiffany Lyle; Jessica Beck; Elizabeth Buza; Qi Gong; Stephen M Hewitt; R Mark Simpson Journal: Acad Pathol Date: 2019-07-11
Authors: Giovanni Lujan; Jennifer C Quigley; Douglas Hartman; Anil Parwani; Brian Roehmholdt; Bryan Van Meter; Orly Ardon; Matthew G Hanna; Dan Kelly; Chelsea Sowards; Michael Montalto; Marilyn Bui; Mark D Zarella; Victoria LaRosa; Gerard Slootweg; Juan Antonio Retamero; Mark C Lloyd; James Madory; Doug Bowman Journal: J Pathol Inform Date: 2021-04-07