Digital Whole Slide Imaging Compared With Light Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter, Double-Blinded, Randomized Study of 2045 Cases.

Context.--The adoption of digital capture of pathology slides as whole slide images (WSI) for educational and research applications has proven utility. Objective.--To compare pathologists' primary diagnoses derived from WSI versus the standard microscope. Because WSIs differ in format and method of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine Vol. 144; no. 10; pp. 1245 - 1254
Autores principales: Borowsky, Alexander D., Glassy, Eric F., Wallace, William Dean, Kallichanda, Nathash S., Behling, Cynthia A., Miller, Dylan V., Oswal, Hemlata N., Feddersen, Richard M., Bakhtar, Omid R., Mendoza, Arturo E., Molden, Daniel P., Saffer, Helene L., Wixom, Christopher R., Albro, James E., Cessna, Melissa H., Hall, Brian J., Lloyd, Isaac E., Bishop, John W., Darrow, Morgan A., Gui, Dorina
Formato: research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article
Publicado: College of American Pathologists Oct2020
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=146256079&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 146256079
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00039985
        1FS
      jtl: Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
      issn: 00039985
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2020
      vid: 144
      iid: 10
      pid: 2550
      pub: College of American Pathologists
      place: Northfield, Illinois
    artinfo:
      ui:
        146256079
        146256079
        146256079
        10.5858/arpa.2019-0569-OA
        146256079
      ppf: 1245
      ppct: 9
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Digital Whole Slide Imaging Compared With Light Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter, Double-Blinded, Randomized Study of 2045 Cases.
      aug:
        au:
          Borowsky, Alexander D.
          Glassy, Eric F.
          Wallace, William Dean
          Kallichanda, Nathash S.
          Behling, Cynthia A.
          Miller, Dylan V.
          Oswal, Hemlata N.
          Feddersen, Richard M.
          Bakhtar, Omid R.
          Mendoza, Arturo E.
          Molden, Daniel P.
          Saffer, Helene L.
          Wixom, Christopher R.
          Albro, James E.
          Cessna, Melissa H.
          Hall, Brian J.
          Lloyd, Isaac E.
          Bishop, John W.
          Darrow, Morgan A.
          Gui, Dorina
        affil: Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento
      sug:
        subj:
          Pathology, Clinical
          Diagnosis, Laboratory
          Microscopy, Virtual Utilization
          Microscopy
          Pathologists
          Human
          Randomized Controlled Trials
          Multicenter Studies
          Double-Blind Studies
          Comparative Studies
          Descriptive Statistics
          Confidence Intervals
          Odds Ratio
          Time Factors
      ab: Context.--The adoption of digital capture of pathology slides as whole slide images (WSI) for educational and research applications has proven utility. Objective.--To compare pathologists' primary diagnoses derived from WSI versus the standard microscope. Because WSIs differ in format and method of observation compared with the current standard glass slide microscopy, this study is critical to potential clinical adoption of digital pathology. Design.--The study enrolled a total of 2045 cases enriched for more difficult diagnostic categories and represented as 5849 slides were curated and provided for diagnosis by a team of 19 reading pathologists separately as WSI or as glass slides viewed by light microscope. Cases were reviewed by each pathologist in both modalities in randomized order with a minimum 31-day washout between modality reads for each case. Each diagnosis was compared with the original clinical reference diagnosis by an independent central adjudication review. Results.--The overall major discrepancy rates were 3.64% for WSI review and 3.20% for manual slide review diagnosis methods, a difference of 0.44% (95%CI, -0.15 to 1.03). The time to review a case averaged 5.20 minutes for WSI and 4.95 minutes for glass slides. There was no specific subset of diagnostic category that showed higher rates of modality-specific discrepancy, though some categories showed greater discrepancy than others in both modalities. Conclusions.--WSIs are noninferior to traditional glass slides for primary diagnosis in anatomic pathology.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        randomized controlled trial
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N