Ogrzewalla Hanna, Möhrle Matthias, Metzler Gisela, Eigentler Thomas, Münch Anne-Kristin, Forchhammer Stephan
Department of Dermatology, Eberhardt Karls Universität, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.
Praxisklinik Haut und Venen, 72072 Tübingen, Germany.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Dec 2;12(12):3030. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12123030.
Digitally stained ex vivo confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) scans are a possible alternative to formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) and hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) stained slides. This study explores the diagnostic accuracy of digitally-stained CLSM scans in comparison to H&E-stained slides in various dermatologic diseases in a real-life setting.
Samples of patients out of one selected dermatologic office were primarily scanned via CLSM; a diagnosis was made afterwards using FFPE- and H&E-stained slides by two experienced dermatopathologists. Primary outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis in digitally stained CLSM scans in three separate diagnostic groups.
CLSM evaluation of epithelial tumors (n = 132) demonstrated a sensitivity of 64.3%/83.9% and a specificity of 84.2%/71.1%. Diagnosis of melanocytic tumors (n = 86) showed a sensitivity of 19.1%/85.1% and a specificity of 96.3%/66.7%. In the diagnosis of other tumors/cysts and inflammatory dermatoses (n = 42), a sensitivity of 96.4%/96.8% and a specificity of 57.1%/45.5% was reached.
This study shows the possibilities and limitations of a broad use of CLSM. Because of a partly low diagnostic accuracy, such an application does not seem to be recommendable at present for every indication.
数字染色的离体共聚焦激光扫描显微镜(CLSM)扫描可能是福尔马林固定石蜡包埋(FFPE)和苏木精-伊红(H&E)染色玻片的替代方法。本研究在实际环境中探讨了数字染色的CLSM扫描与H&E染色玻片相比在各种皮肤病中的诊断准确性。
从一个选定的皮肤科诊所选取患者样本,首先通过CLSM进行扫描;随后由两位经验丰富的皮肤病理学家使用FFPE和H&E染色玻片做出诊断。主要结果是在三个独立诊断组中数字染色的CLSM扫描诊断的敏感性和特异性。
CLSM对上皮肿瘤(n = 132)的评估显示敏感性为64.3%/83.9%,特异性为84.2%/71.1%。黑素细胞肿瘤(n = 86)的诊断显示敏感性为19.1%/85.1%,特异性为96.3%/66.7%。在其他肿瘤/囊肿和炎症性皮肤病(n = 42)的诊断中,敏感性为96.4%/96.8%,特异性为57.1%/45.5%。
本研究显示了广泛使用CLSM的可能性和局限性。由于部分诊断准确性较低,目前这种应用似乎并非对每种适应症都推荐。