Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Diagnostic Pathology 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Proceedings

iPathology cockpit diagnostic station: validation according to College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center recommendation at the Hospital Trust and University of Verona

Authors: Matteo Brunelli, Serena Beccari, Romano Colombari, Stefano Gobbo, Luca Giobelli, Andrea Pellegrini, Marco Chilosi, Maria Lunardi, Guido Martignoni, Aldo Scarpa, Albino Eccher

Published in: Diagnostic Pathology | Special Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Validation of digital whole slide images is crucial to ensure that diagnostic performance is at least equivalent to that of glass slides and light microscopy. The College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center recently developed recommendations for internal digital pathology system validation. Following these guidelines we sought to validate the performance of a digital approach for routine diagnosis by using an iPad and digital control widescreen-assisted workstation through a pilot study.

Methods

From January 2014, 61 histopathological slides were scanned by ScanScope Digital Slides Scanner (Aperio, Vista, CA). Two independent pathologists performed diagnosis on virtual slides in front of a widescreen by using two computer devices (ImageScope viewing software) located to different Health Institutions (AOUI Verona) connected by local network and a remote image server using an iPad tablet (Aperio, Vista, CA), after uploading the Citrix receiver for iPad. Quality indicators related to image characters and work-flow of the e-health cockpit enterprise system were scored based on subjective (high vs poor) perception. The images were re-evaluated two weeks apart.

Results

The whole glass slides encountered 10 liver: hepatocarcinoma, 10 renal carcinoma, 10 gastric carcinoma and 10 prostate biopsies: adenocarcinoma, 5 excisional skin biopsies: melanoma, 5 lymph-nodes: lymphoma. 6 immuno- and 5 special stains were available for intra- and internet remote viewing. Scan times averaged two minutes and 54 seconds per slide (standard deviation 2 minutes 34 seconds). Megabytes ranged from 256 to 680 (mean 390) per slide storage. Reliance on glass slide, image quality (resolution and color fidelity), slide navigation time, simultaneous viewers in geographically remote locations were considered of high performance score. Side by side comparisons between diagnosis performed on tissue glass slides versus widescreen were excellent showing an almost perfect concordance (0.81, kappa index).

Conclusions

We validated our institutional digital pathology system for routine diagnostic facing with whole slide images in a cockpit enterprise digital system or iPad tablet. Computer widescreens are better for diagnosing scanned glass slide that iPad. For urgent requests, iPad may be used. Legal aspects have to be soon faced with to permit the clinical use of this technology in a manner that does not compromise patient care.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Park S, Pantanowitz L, Parwani AV: Digital imaging in pathology. Clin Lab Med. 2012, 32: 557-584. 10.1016/j.cll.2012.07.006.CrossRefPubMed Park S, Pantanowitz L, Parwani AV: Digital imaging in pathology. Clin Lab Med. 2012, 32: 557-584. 10.1016/j.cll.2012.07.006.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Lange H: Digital Pathology: A Regulatory Overview. Lab Medicine. 2011, 42: 587-591. 10.1309/LMA2M9NQQF0ZCVHC.CrossRef Lange H: Digital Pathology: A Regulatory Overview. Lab Medicine. 2011, 42: 587-591. 10.1309/LMA2M9NQQF0ZCVHC.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Pantanowitz L, Sinard JH, Henricks WH, Fatheree LA, Carter AB, Contis L, Beckwith BA, Evans AJ, Lal A, Parwani AV: Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013, 137: 1710-1722. 10.5858/arpa.2013-0093-CP.CrossRefPubMed Pantanowitz L, Sinard JH, Henricks WH, Fatheree LA, Carter AB, Contis L, Beckwith BA, Evans AJ, Lal A, Parwani AV: Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013, 137: 1710-1722. 10.5858/arpa.2013-0093-CP.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Wienert S, Beil M, Saeger K, Hufnagl P, Schrader T: Integration and acceleration of virtual microscopy as the key to successful implementation into the routine diagnostic process. Diagn Pathol. 2009, 4: 3-10.1186/1746-1596-4-3.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Wienert S, Beil M, Saeger K, Hufnagl P, Schrader T: Integration and acceleration of virtual microscopy as the key to successful implementation into the routine diagnostic process. Diagn Pathol. 2009, 4: 3-10.1186/1746-1596-4-3.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference García Rojo M: State of the art and trends for digital pathology. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012, 179: 15-28.PubMed García Rojo M: State of the art and trends for digital pathology. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012, 179: 15-28.PubMed
7.
8.
go back to reference Daniel C, Rojo MG, Klossa J, Della Mea V, Booker D, Beckwith BA, Schrader T: Standardizing the use of whole slide images in digital pathology. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2011, 35: 496-505. 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2010.12.004.CrossRefPubMed Daniel C, Rojo MG, Klossa J, Della Mea V, Booker D, Beckwith BA, Schrader T: Standardizing the use of whole slide images in digital pathology. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2011, 35: 496-505. 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2010.12.004.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ramey J, Fung KM, Hassell LA: Use of mobile high-resolution device for remote frozen section evaluation of whole slide images. J Pathol Inform. 2011, 2: 41-10.4103/2153-3539.84276.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Ramey J, Fung KM, Hassell LA: Use of mobile high-resolution device for remote frozen section evaluation of whole slide images. J Pathol Inform. 2011, 2: 41-10.4103/2153-3539.84276.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
iPathology cockpit diagnostic station: validation according to College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center recommendation at the Hospital Trust and University of Verona
Authors
Matteo Brunelli
Serena Beccari
Romano Colombari
Stefano Gobbo
Luca Giobelli
Andrea Pellegrini
Marco Chilosi
Maria Lunardi
Guido Martignoni
Aldo Scarpa
Albino Eccher
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology / Issue Special Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1746-1596
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-9-S1-S12

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2014

Diagnostic Pathology 1/2014 Go to the issue