Digital Slide and Virtual Microscopy-Based Routine and Telepathology Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Biopsy Specimen

  • Bela Molnar
  • Lajos Berczi
  • Levente Ficsor
  • Viktor Varga
  • Attila Tagscherer
  • Zsolt Tulassay
Chapter

Aims: Evaluation of a recently developed digital slide scanning and virtual microscope (VM) system and its comparison with optical microscopy on routine gastric biopsy specimen in local and remote access mode.

Methods: A digital slide scanning system was used (Mirax Scan 3DHISTECH Ltd., Budapest, Hungary). The scanning program included label area barcode identification, object detection, autofocus, and image compression algorithms. The overall hard-disk place for a gastric biopsy was between 30 and 50 megabytes and the scanning time was between 2 and 4 min. H/E-stained routine gastric (61) and colon (42) biopsy specimen were selected, scanned, and evaluated by two specialists on an optical microscope (OM) and a VM.

Results: The overall concordance of VM to a consensus diagnosis (CON) was 96.1% and that of the OM to a CON was 97%. The clinically important concordances were 97% and 98%, respectively. The two methods showed concordance in 93% and clinically important concordance in 95%. The reasons of the discordance were interpretation difference (four cases) and insufficient clinical information (three cases). Remote evaluation of the digital slides through Internet shows the combined advantages of the previously used static and dynamic telepathology methods.

Conclusions: At present, scanning speed and automation of scanning are already here for routine application on gastrointestinal biopsy specimen. Digital slide and the VM are ready for the computerization of the histology laboratory and in teleconsultation services. Our partial study proved the immediate opportunity for the application in gastrointestinal specimen.

Keywords

Proficiency Testing Cervical Cancer Screening Chronic Gastritis Hyperplastic Polyp Consensus Diagnosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson TL, Nelson AC (1995) Quality control and proficiency testing of cytological smear screening: an integrated approach using automation. In: Wied GL, Keebler CM, Rosenthal DL, Schenck U, Somrak TM, Vooijs GP (eds) Compendium on quality assurance, proficiency testing and workload limitations on clinical cytology. Tutorials of Cytology, Chicago, IL, pp. 83 –287Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker RW, Wadsworth J, Brugal G, Coleman DV (1998) An evaluation of “rapid review ” as a method of quality control of cervical smears using the AxioHOME microscope. Cytopa-thology 8:85 –95Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Belhomme P, Elmoataz A, Herlin P, Bloyet D (1996) Generalised region growing operator with optimal scanning: application to segmentation of breast cancer images. J Microsc 886:41 –50Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burns BF (1997) Creating low power photomicrographs using a 35 mm digital slide scanner. Am J Surg Pathol 21:865 –866PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dee FR (2006) Virtual microscopy for comparative pathology. Toxicol Pathol 34:966 –973PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dictor M (1997) The surgical pathologist in a client/server computer network: work support, quality assurance, and the graphical user interface. Mod Pathol 10:259 –266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dooley RL, Engel C, Muller ME (1997) Automated scanning and digitizing of roentgeno-graphs for documentation and research. Clin Orthop 274:113 –119Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dunn BE, Almagro UA, Choi H, et al (1997) Dynamic-robotic telepathology: department of Veteran Affairs feasibility. Hum Pathol 28:8 –12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eusebi V, Foschini L, Erde S, et al (1997) Transcontinental consults in surgical pathology via the Internet. Hum Pathol 28:13 –16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Firestone L, Cook K, Culp K (1991) Comparison of autofocus methods for automated microscopy. Cytometry 12:195 –206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gombas P, Szende B, Stotz G (1996) Support by telecommunications in diagnostic pathology. Experience with the first telepathology system in Hungary. Orv Hetilap 137:2299 –2303Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grohs DH, Gombrich PP, Domanik RA (1996) AccuMed International, Inc. Meeting the challenges in cervical cancer screening: the AcCell Series 2000 automated slide handling and data management system. Acta Cytol 40:26 –30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grohs DH, Dadeshidze VV, Domanik RA, Gombrich PP, Olsson LJ, Pressman NJ (1997) Utility of the TracCell system in mappingPapanicolaou-stained cytologic material. Acta Cytol 41:144 –152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hailey DM, Lea R (1995) Prospects for newer technologies in cervical cancer screening programmes. J Qual Clin Pract 15:139 –145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Helin HO, Lundin ME, Laakso M, Lundin J, Helin HJ, Isola J (2006) Virtual microscopy in prostate histopathology: simultaneous viewing of biopsies stained sequentially with hematoxylin and eosin, and alpha-methylacyl-coenzyme A racemase/p63 immunohisto-chemistry. J Urol 175:459 –504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leong FJWM, McGee O 'D (2001) Automated complete slide digitization: a medium for simultaneous viewing by multiple pathologists. J Pathol 195:508 –514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mango LJ, Ivasauskas EZ (1995) Computer assisted cervical cytology using the PAPNET testing. In: Wied GL, Keebler CM, Rosenthal DL, Schenck U, Somrak TM, Vooijs GP (eds) Compendium on quality assurance, proficiency testing and workload limitations on clinical cytology. Tutorials of Cytology, Chicago, IL, pp. 155 –167Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    O 'Brien MJ, Sotnikov AV (1996) Digital imaging in anatomic pathology. Am J Clin Pathol 106:25 –32Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ong SH, Jin XC, Sinniah R (1996) Image analysis of tissue sections. Comput Biol Med 26:269 –279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ott SR (1997) Acquisition of high-resolution digital images in video microscopy: automated image mosaicking on a desktop microcomputer. Microsc Res Tech 38:335 –343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shotton DM (1995) Robert Feulgen Prize Lecture 1995. Electronic light microscopy: present capabilities and future prospects. Histochem Cell Biol 104:97 –137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    22.Singson RPC, Natarajan S, Greenson JK, Marchevsky AM (1999) Virtual microscopy and the Internet as telepathology consultation tools. A study of gastrointestinal biopsy specimens. Am J Pathol 111:792 –795Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stewart J III, Myazaki K, Bevans-Wilkins K (2007) Virtual microscopy for cytology proficiency testing: are we there yet? Cancer 111:203 –212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weinberg DS (1996) How is telepathology being used to improve patient care. Clin Chem 42:831 –835PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weinberg DS, Allaert FA, Dusserre P, et al (1996) Telepathology diagnosis by means of digital still images: an international validation study. Hum Pathol 27:111 –118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weinstein RS (1996) Prospects for telepathology. Hum Pathol 17:433 –434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weinstein RS, Battacharayya AK, Graham AR, et al (1997) Telepathology a ten-year progress report. Hum Pathol 28:1 –7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bela Molnar
    • 1
  • Lajos Berczi
    • 2
  • Levente Ficsor
    • 3
  • Viktor Varga
    • 4
  • Attila Tagscherer
    • 5
  • Zsolt Tulassay
    • 6
  1. 1.Digital Microscopy Laboratory2nd Department of Medicine Semmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.1st Department of Pathology and Experimental OncologySemmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary
  3. 3.Digital Microscopy Laboratory, 2nd Department of MedicineSemmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary
  4. 4.Digital Microscopy Laboratory, 2nd Department of MedicineSemmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary
  5. 5.3DHISTECH LtdBudapestHungary
  6. 6.Digital Microscopy Laboratory, 2nd Department of MedicineBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations