Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role in Medicine for Digital Pathology

  • Chapter
Digital Pathology

  • 1111 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents an overview of the role of digital pathology in medicine. After a brief history and background review, this chapter explains how the introduction of digital pathology revolutionized the teaching of pathology among medical students and residents and how it provided new opportunities to share images with remote colleagues for research, tumor boards and clinical activities such as frozen sections, consultations and quality assurance. The different technologies used in digital pathology are presented. They range from static images to whole-slide imaging and hybrid technologies. New usages using mobile devices are also presented. This chapter discusses also how digital pathology may help to improve health care in academic centers, remote hospitals, large cities and developing countries. It also deals with factors affecting the development of clinical telepathology, including technological and human barriers as well as legal, organizational and licensure issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Williams S, Henricks WH, Becich MJ, Toscano M, Carter AB. Telepathology for patient care: what am I getting myself into? Adv Anat Pathol. 2010;17(2):130–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weinstein RS, Graham AR, Lian F, Braunhut BL, Barker GR, Krupinski EA, et al. Reconciliation of diverse telepathology system designs. Historic issues and implications for emerging markets and new applications. APMIS. 2012;120(4):256–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nordrum I, Engum B, Rinde E, Finseth A, Ericsson H, Kearney M, et al. Remote frozen section service: a telepathology project in Northern Norway. Hum Pathol. 1991;22(6):514–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hitchcock CL. The future of telepathology for the developing world. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135(2):211–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Park S, Parwani AV, Aller RD, Banach L, Becich MJ, Borkenfeld S, et al. The history of pathology informatics: a global perspective. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kayser K, Borkenfeld S, Djenouni A, Kayser G. History and structures of telecommunication in pathology, focusing on open access platforms. Diagn Pathol. 2011;6:110.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Pantanowitz L, Wiley CA, Demetris A, Lesniak A, Ahmed I, Cable W, et al. Experience with multimodality telepathology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. J Pathol Inform. 2012;3:45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Bauer TW, Schoenfield L, Slaw RJ, Yerian L, Sun Z, Henricks WH. Validation of whole slide imaging for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(4):518–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Evans AJ, Perez-Ordonez B, Asa SL. Primary diagnosis by whole slide imaging (WSI) telepathology: University health network (UHN) goes live. Lab Investig. 2014;94:399A.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Perron E, Louahlia S, Nadeau L, Boilard F, Ing M, Orain M, et al. Telepathology for intraoperative consultations and expert opinions: the experience of the eastern Quebec telepathology network. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(9):1223–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dee FR. Virtual microscopy in pathology education. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(8):1112–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pantanowitz L, Valenstein PN, Evans AJ, Kaplan KJ, Pfeifer JD, Wilbur DC, et al. Review of the current state of whole slide imaging in pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2011;2:36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Bruch LA, De Young BR, Kreiter CD, Haugen TH, Leaven TC, Dee FR. Competency assessment of residents in surgical pathology using virtual microscopy. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(8):1122–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hassell LA, Fung KM, Chaser B. Digital slides and ACGME resident competencies in anatomic pathology: an altered paradigm for acquisition and assessment. J Pathol Inform. 2011;2:27.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Li L, Dangott BJ, Parwani AV. Development and use of a genitourinary pathology digital teaching set for trainee education. J Pathol Inform. 2010;1:2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Cagle PT, Glassy EF. Whole slide images add value to journal article figures. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(5):592.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tecotzky R. Digital pathology enhances hospital’s tumor board meetings. MLO Med Lab Obs. 2009;41(11):60.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chen ZW, Kohan J, Perkins SL, Hussong JW, Salama ME. Web-based oil immersion whole slide imaging increases efficiency and clinical team satisfaction in hematopathology tumor board. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Evans AJ, Chetty R, Clarke BA, Croul S, Ghazarian DM, Kiehl TR, et al. Primary frozen section diagnosis by robotic microscopy and virtual slide telepathology: the University Health Network experience. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2009;26(4):165–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Thorstenson S, Molin J, Lundstrom C. Implementation of large-scale routine diagnostics using whole slide imaging in Sweden: digital pathology experiences 2006-2013. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Bernard C, Chandrakanth SA, Cornell IS, Dalton J, Evans A, Garcia BM, et al. Guidelines from the Canadian Association of Pathologists for establishing a telepathology service for anatomic pathology using whole-slide imaging. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Pantanowitz L, Dickinson K, Evans AJ, Hassell LA, Henricks WH, Lennerz JK, et al. American Telemedicine Association clinical guidelines for telepathology. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Pantanowitz L, Sinard JH, Henricks WH, Fatheree LA, Carter AB, Contis L, et al. 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(12):1710–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tetu B, Evans A. Canadian licensure for the use of digital pathology for routine diagnoses: one more step toward a new era of pathology practice without borders. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(3):302–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pantanowitz L, Hornish M, Goulart RA. The impact of digital imaging in the field of cytopathology. Cytojournal. 2009;6:6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Evans AJ, Chetty R, Clarke BA, Croul S, Ghazarian DM, Kiehl TR, et al. Primary frozen section diagnosis by robotic microscopy and virtual slide telepathology: the University Health Network experience. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(8):1070–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gould P, Saikali S, Tetu B. Teleneuropathology in Canada in 2012. Can J Neurol Sci. 2013;40(1):113–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Fallon MA, Wilbur DC, Prasad M. Ovarian frozen section diagnosis: use of whole-slide imaging shows excellent correlation between virtual slide and original interpretations in a large series of cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(7):1020–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zhao C, Wu T, Ding X. International telepathology consultation: an experience from UPMC and Kingmed (China). Lab Invest. 2014;94:404A–5A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bauer TW, Slaw RJ. Validating whole-slide imaging for consultation diagnoses in surgical pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(11):1459–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Krishnamurthy S, Mathews K, McClure S, Murray M, Gilcrease M, Albarracin C, et al. Multi-institutional comparison of whole slide digital imaging and optical microscopy for interpretation of hematoxylin-eosin-stained breast tissue sections. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(12):1733–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Stathonikos N, Veta M, Huisman A, van Diest PJ. Going fully digital: perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Thrall MJ, Rivera AL, Takei H, Powell SZ. Validation of a novel robotic telepathology platform for neuropathology intraoperative touch preparations. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Hartman DJ, Parwani AV, Cable B, Cucoranu IC, McHugh JS, Kolowitz BJ, et al. Pocket pathologist: a mobile application for rapid diagnostic surgical pathology consultation. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Têtu B, Gagnon MP, Roch G, Fortin JP. The Eastern Quebec Telepathology Network: a support to the improvement to the public health care system. Diagn Pathol. 2013;8 Suppl 1:S8.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Ghaznavi F, Evans A, Madabhushi A, Feldman M. Digital imaging in pathology: whole-slide imaging and beyond. Annu Rev Pathol. 2013;8:331–59.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kaplan KJ. Needs and workflow assessment prior to implementation of a digital pathology infrastructure for the US Air Force Medical Service. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Ho J, Aridor O, Glinski DW, Saylor CD, Pelletier JP, Selby DM, et al. Needs and workflow assessment prior to implementation of a digital pathology infrastructure for the US Air Force Medical Service. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Dunn BE, Choi H, Almagro UA, Recla DL, Davis CW. Telepathology networking in VISN-12 of the Veterans Health Administration. Telemed J E Health. 2000;6(3):349–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Fontelo PA, DiNino E, Johansen K, Khan A, Ackerman MJ. Virtual microscopy: potential applications in medical education and telemedicine in countries with developing economies. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meetings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 3-6 Jan 2005, p 153c.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Gimbel DC, Sohani AR, Prasad Busarla SV, Kirimi JM, Sayed S, Okiro P, et al. A static-image telepathology system for dermatopathology consultation in East Africa: the Massachusetts General Hospital experience. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67(5):997–1007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Hassell LA, Fung KM. Digital pathology for educational, quality improvement, research and other settings. In: Pantanowitz L, Parwani AV, editors. Digital pathology. Chicago, IL: ASCP Press; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Settakorn J, Kuakpaetoon T, Leong FJ, Thamprasert K, Ichijima K. Store-and-forward diagnostic telepathology of small biopsies by e-mail attachment: a feasibility pilot study with a view for future application in Thailand diagnostic pathology services. Telemed J E Health. 2002;8(3):333–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Kadaba V, Ly T, Noor S, Chhut SV, Hinsch N, Stauch G, et al. A hybrid approach to telepathology in Cambodia. J Telemed Telecare. 2013;19(8):475–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tetu B, Fortin JP, Gagnon MP, Louahlia S. The challenges of implementing a “patient-oriented” telepathology network; the Eastern Quebec telepathology project experience. Anal Cell Pathol (Amst). 2012;35(1):11–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lowe J. Telepathology: guideline from the Royal College of Pathologists. 2013. http://www.rcpath.org/Resources/RCPath/Migrated%20Resources/Documents/G/G026_Telepathology_Oct13.pdf

  48. Campbell WS, Lele SM, West WW, Lazenby AJ, Smith LM, Hinrichs SH. Concordance between whole-slide imaging and light microscopy for routine surgical pathology. Hum Pathol. 2012;43(10):1739–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Lange H. Digital pathology: a regulatory overview. Lab Med. 2011;42:587–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Hassell LA, Glassy E. The (not yet) willingly adopted tool. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Parwani AV, Hassell L, Glassy E, Pantanowitz L. Regulatory barriers surrounding the use of whole slide imaging in the United States of America. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5:38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Faisel T. Historical overview of FDA regulation of digital pathology imaging. 2014. www.fda.gov/…/HematologyandPathologyDevicesPanel/UCM201450.ppt. Accessed 19 Sep 2014.

  53. Lloyd MC, Allam-Nandyala P, Purohit CN, Burke N, Coppola D, Bui MM. Using image analysis as a tool for assessment of prognostic and predictive biomarkers for breast cancer: how reliable is it? J Pathol Inform. 2010;1:29.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Dierks C. Legal aspects of telepathology. Anal Cell Pathol. 2000;21(3-4):97–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Leung ST, Kaplan KJ. Medicolegal aspects of telepathology. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(8):1137–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Patterson ES, Rayo M, Gill C, Gurcan MN. Barriers and facilitators to adoption of soft copy interpretation from the user perspective: lessons learned from filmless radiology for slideless pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2011;2:1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire [CHU] de Québec, Hôpital du St-Sacrement, 1050 Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, G1S 4 L8, Canada

    Bernard Têtu M.D.

  2. Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Québec, Canada

    Bernard Têtu M.D.

  3. Department of Pathology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 940 Stanton L. Young Blvd., Room 451, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA

    Lewis A. Hassell M.D.

Authors
  1. Bernard Têtu M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lewis A. Hassell M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernard Têtu M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Carolinas Pathology Group, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA

    Keith J. Kaplan

  2. Massachusetts General Hospital 249C Gray-Jackson Building, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Luigi K.F. Rao

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Têtu, B., Hassell, L.A. (2016). Role in Medicine for Digital Pathology. In: Kaplan, K., Rao, L. (eds) Digital Pathology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20379-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20379-9_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20378-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20379-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation