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

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Matteo Brunelli (36)
  Serena Beccari (36)
  Romano Colombari (37)
  Stefano Gobbo (36)
  Luca Giobelli (38)
  Andrea Pellegrini (38)
  Marco Chilosi (36)
  Maria Lunardi (37)
  Guido Martignoni (36)
  Aldo Scarpa (36) (39)
  Albino Eccher (36)
  
  36. Department of Pathology and Diagnostics and Hospital Trust ; University of Verona ; Kragujevac ; Italy
  37. Fra Castoro Hospital ; San Bonifacio Verona ; ULSS20 ; Italy
  38. IT Department CED ; AOUI ; Verona ; Italy
  39. ARC-net ; Verona ; Italy
  
• 刊名：Diagnostic Pathology
• 出版年：2014
• 出版时间：December 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：9
• 期：1-supp
• 全文大小：344 KB
• 参考文献：1. Park, S, Pantanowitz, L, Parwani, AV (2012) Digital imaging in pathology. Clin Lab Med 32: pp. 557-584 CrossRef
  2. Dangott, B, Parwani, A (2010) Whole slide imaging for teleconsultation and clinical use. J Pathol Inform 1: pp. 7 CrossRef
  3. Lange, H (2011) Digital Pathology: A Regulatory Overview. Lab Medicine 42: pp. 587-591 CrossRef
  4. Pantanowitz, L, Sinard, JH, Henricks, WH, Fatheree, LA, Carter, AB, Contis, L, Beckwith, BA, Evans, AJ, Lal, A, Parwani, AV (2013) 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 137: pp. 1710-1722 CrossRef
  5. Wienert, S, Beil, M, Saeger, K, Hufnagl, P, Schrader, T (2009) Integration and acceleration of virtual microscopy as the key to successful implementation into the routine diagnostic process. Diagn Pathol 4: pp. 3 CrossRef
  6. Garc铆a Rojo, M (2012) State of the art and trends for digital pathology. Stud Health Technol Inform 179: pp. 15-28
  7. Stathonikos, N, Veta, M, Huisman, A, van Diest, PJ (2013) Going fully digital: Perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab. J Pathol Inform 4: pp. 15 CrossRef
  8. Daniel, C, Rojo, MG, Klossa, J, Della Mea, V, Booker, D, Beckwith, BA, Schrader, T (2011) Standardizing the use of whole slide images in digital pathology. Comput Med Imaging Graph 35: pp. 496-505 CrossRef
  9. Jefferson E: FDA clears first diagnostic radiology application for mobile devices. [http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm242295.htm]
  10. Ramey, J, Fung, KM, Hassell, LA (2011) Use of mobile high-resolution device for remote frozen section evaluation of whole slide images. J Pathol Inform 2: pp. 41 CrossRef
  
• 刊物主题：Pathology;
• 出版者：BioMed Central
• ISSN：1746-1596

文摘

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.