Bongaerts Odille, Clevers Carla, Debets Marij, Paffen Daniëlle, Senden Lisanne, Rijks Kim, Ruiten Linda, Sie-Go Daisy, van Diest Paul J, Nap Marius
Department of Pathology, Zuyderland Hospital, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J Pathol Inform. 2018 Aug 27;9:29. doi: 10.4103/jpi.jpi_28_18. eCollection 2018.
Whole-slide imaging (WSI) has been implemented in many areas of pathology, but primary diagnostics of cytological specimens are lagging behind. One of the objectives of viewing scanned whole-slide images from histological or cytological specimens is remote exchange of knowledge and expertise of professionals to increase diagnostic accuracy. We compared the scoring results of our team obtained in double readings of two different data sets: conventional light microscopy (CLM) versus CLM and CLM versus WSI. We hypothesized that WSI is noninferior to CLM for primary diagnostics of thin-layer cervical slides.
First, we determined the concordance rate at different thresholds of the participating cytotechnicians by double reading with CLM of 500 thin-layer cervical slides (Cohort 1). Next, CLM was compared with WSI examination of another 505 thin-layer cervical slides (Cohort 2) scanned at ×20 in single focus plane. Finally, all major discordant cases of Cohort 1 were evaluated by an external expert in the field of gynecological cytology and of Cohort 2 in the weekly case meetings.
The overall concordance rate of Cohort 1 (CLM vs. CLM) was 97.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.0%-98.7%) and of Cohort 2 was 95.3% (95% CI: 93.0%-96.9%).
Concordance rates of WSI versus CLM were comparable with those of CLM versus CLM. We have made a step forward paving the road to implementation of WSI also in routine diagnostic cytology.
全玻片成像(WSI)已在病理学的许多领域得到应用,但细胞学标本的初步诊断仍滞后。查看组织学或细胞学标本的扫描全玻片图像的目标之一是专业人员进行远程知识和专业技能交流,以提高诊断准确性。我们比较了我们团队在对两个不同数据集进行双读时获得的评分结果:传统光学显微镜(CLM)与CLM对比,以及CLM与WSI对比。我们假设在薄层宫颈涂片的初步诊断中,WSI不劣于CLM。
首先,我们通过对500张薄层宫颈涂片(队列1)进行CLM双读,确定了参与的细胞技术人员在不同阈值下的一致性率。接下来,将CLM与另一组505张在单焦平面以×20扫描的薄层宫颈涂片(队列2)的WSI检查进行比较。最后,队列1的所有主要不一致病例由妇科细胞学领域的外部专家评估,队列2的病例在每周的病例讨论会上评估。
队列1(CLM与CLM对比)的总体一致性率为97.8%(95%置信区间[CI]:96.0%-98.7%),队列2为95.3%(95%CI:93.0%-96.9%)。
WSI与CLM的一致性率与CLM与CLM的一致性率相当。我们向前迈进了一步,为在常规诊断细胞学中实施WSI铺平了道路。