Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Whole Slide Imaging in Cytopathology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Whole Slide Imaging

  • 965 Accesses

Abstract

Whole slide imaging (WSI) can digitize glass slides for users to remotely view slides using computer monitors instead of microscopes. WSI success in pathology has largely been dedicated to surgical pathology with FDA approval for primary diagnosis and other clinical and non-clinical applications. The application of WSI to cytopathology is still limited due to certain unique challenges related to cytology image acquisition (e.g., focus) and cytology workflow (e.g., screening). However, WSI has the potential to broaden its scope to cytopathology with new emerging techniques. The aim of this chapter is to review current WSI applications, examine unique challenges, and discuss future advances in the field of cytopathology.

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 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
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. 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  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. El-Garby EAPA, Pantanowitz L. Whole slide imaging: widening the scope of cytopathology. Diagn Histopathol. 2014;20:456–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhao C, Wu T, Ding X, Parwani AV, Chen H, McHugh J, et al. International telepathology consultation: Three years of experience between the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and KingMed Diagnostics in China. J Pathol Inform. 2015;6:63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Amin MPA, Pantanowitz L. In: PA P, editor. Digital imaging. New York: Springer; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 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 

  6. Snead DR, Tsang YW, Meskiri A, Kimani PK, Crossman R, Rajpoot NM, et al. Validation of digital pathology imaging for primary histopathological diagnosis. Histopathology. 2016;68(7):1063–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. House JC, Henderson-Jackson EB, Johnson JO, Lloyd MC, Dhillon J, Ahmad N, et al. Diagnostic digital cytopathology: are we ready yet? J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Evered A, Dudding N. Accuracy and perceptions of virtual microscopy compared with glass slide microscopy in cervical cytology. Cytopathology. 2011;22(2):82–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fan Y, Bradley AP. A method for quantitative analysis of clump thickness in cervical cytology slides. Micron (Oxford, England : 1993). 2016;80:73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pantanowitz L, Parwani AV, Khalbuss WE. Digital imaging for cytopathology: are we there yet? Cytopathology. 2011;22(2):73–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Donnelly AD, Mukherjee MS, Lyden ER, Bridge JA, Lele SM, Wright N, et al. Optimal z-axis scanning parameters for gynecologic cytology specimens. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4:38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Wright AM, Smith D, Dhurandhar B, Fairley T, Scheiber-Pacht M, Chakraborty S, et al. Digital slide imaging in cervicovaginal cytology: a pilot study. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(5):618–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Donnelly A, Mukherjee M, Schneider J, Lyden E, Lele S, McGaughey M, et al. Z-Axis scanning parameters: an investigation of consistency. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2014;3(5):S79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Goswami R, Pi D, Pal J, Cheng K. Hudoba De Badyn M. performance evaluation of a dynamic telepathology system (Panoptiq) in the morphologic assessment of peripheral blood film abnormalities. Int J Lab Hematol. 2015;37(3):365–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pradhan D, Monaco SE, Parwani AV, Ahmed I, Duboy J, Pantanowitz L. Evaluation of panoramic digital images using Panoptiq for frozen section diagnosis. J Pathol Inform. 2016;7:26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Hanna MG, Monaco SE, Cuda J, Xing J, Ahmed I, Pantanowitz L. Comparison of glass slides and various digital-slide modalities for cytopathology screening and interpretation. Cancer Cytopathol. 2017;125(9):701–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Groen R, Abe K, Yoon HS, Li Z, Shen R, Yoshikawa A, et al. Application of microscope-based scanning software (Panoptiq) for the interpretation of cervicovaginal cytology specimens. Cancer Cytopathol. 2017;125(12):918–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tawfik O, Davis M, Dillon S, Tawfik L, Diaz FJ, Amin K, et al. Whole-slide imaging of pap cellblock preparations is a potentially valid screening method. Acta Cytol. 2015;59(2):187–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sellaro T, Filkins R, Hoffman C, Fine J, Ho J, Parwani A, et al. Relationship between magnification and resolution in digital pathology systems. J Pathol Inform. 2013;4(1):21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Pantanowitz L, Nayar R, Auger M, Schmitt F, Wasserman P, Wilbur DC, et al. Evaluation of the international academy of cytology (IAC) virtual slide library. J Pathol Inform. 2012;3:46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Khalbuss WE, Cuda J, Cucoranu IC. Screening and dotting virtual slides: a new challenge for cytotechnologists. Cyto J. 2013;10:22.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Yagi Y, Yoshioka S, Kyusojin H, Onozato M, Mizutani Y, Osato K, et al. An ultra-high speed whole slide image viewing system. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;179:239–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cheng CL, Azhar R, Sng SH, Chua YQ, Hwang JS, Chin JP, et al. Enabling digital pathology in the diagnostic setting: navigating through the implementation journey in an academic medical Centre. J Clin Pathol. 2016;69(9):784–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 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 

  25. 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(1):14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Evans AJ, Bauer TW, Bui MM, Cornish TC, Duncan H, Glassy EF, et al. US Food and Drug Administration approval of whole slide imaging for primary diagnosis: a key milestone is reached and new questions are raised. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2018;142(11):1383–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wilbur DC, Madi K, Colvin RB, Duncan LM, Faquin WC, Ferry JA, et al. Whole-slide imaging digital pathology as a platform for teleconsultation: a pilot study using paired subspecialist correlations. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(12):1949–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee ES, Kim IS, Choi JS, Yeom BW, Kim HK, Han JH, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of telecytology diagnosis of cervical smears. A tool for quality assurance programs. Am J Clin Pathol. 2003;119(3):356–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Galvez J, Howell L, Costa MJ, Davis R. Diagnostic concordance of telecytology and conventional cytology for evaluating breast aspirates. Acta Cytol. 1998;42(3):663–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hedvat CV. Digital microscopy: past, present, and future. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(11):1666–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pantanowitz L. Digital images and the future of digital pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2010;1:PMC2941968.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mosquera-Zamudio A, Hanna M, Monaco S, Xing J, Harper T, Zhao C, et al. International telecytology feasibility using digitally scanned cell block slides. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2017;6(5):S53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lin O. Telecytology for rapid on-site evaluation: current status. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2018;7(1):1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Agarwal S, Zhao L, Zhang R, Hassell L. FaceTime validation study: low-cost streaming video for cytology adequacy assessment. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(3):213–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Alsharif M, Carlo-Demovich J, Massey C, Madory JE, Lewin D, Medina AM, et al. Telecytopathology for immediate evaluation of fine-needle aspiration specimens. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010;118(3):119–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cai G, Teot LA, Khalbuss WE, Yu J, Monaco SE, Jukic DM, et al. Cytologic evaluation of image-guided fine needle aspiration biopsies via robotic microscopy: a validation study. J Pathol Inform. 2010;1:4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sirintrapun SJ, Rudomina D, Mazzella A, Feratovic R, Alago W, Siegelbaum R, et al. Robotic Telecytology for remote Cytologic evaluation without an on-site cytotechnologist or Cytopathologist: a tale of implementation and review of constraints. J Pathol Inform. 2017;8:32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Steinberg DM, Ali SZ. Application of virtual microscopy in clinical cytopathology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;25(6):389–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bauer TW, Slaw RJ, McKenney JK, Patil DT. Validation of whole slide imaging for frozen section diagnosis in surgical pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2015;6:49.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Rojo MG, Garcia GB, Mateos CP, Garcia JG, Vicente MC. Critical comparison of 31 commercially available digital slide systems in pathology. Int J Surg Pathol. 2006;14(4):285–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. McKay RR, Baxi VA, Montalto MC. The accuracy of dynamic predictive autofocusing for whole slide imaging. J Pathol Inform. 2011;2:38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Zwonitzer R, Hofmann H, Roessner A, Kalinski T. Virtual 3D microscopy in pathology education. Hum Pathol. 2010;41(3):457–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Romer DJ, Suster S. Use of virtual microscopy for didactic live-audience presentation in anatomic pathology. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2003;7(1):67–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Stewart J, Bevans-Wilkins K, Bhattacharya A, Ye C, Miyazaki K, Kurtycz DFI. Virtual microscopy: an educator's tool for the enhancement of cytotechnology students' locator skills. Diagn Cytopathol. 2008;36(6):363–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Saco A, Bombi JA, Garcia A, Ramirez J, Ordi J. Current status of whole-slide imaging in education. Pathobiology. 2016;83(2–3):79–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Fonyad L, Gerely L, Cserneky M, Molnar B, Matolcsy A. Shifting gears higher--digital slides in graduate education--4 years experience at Semmelweis University. Diagn Pathol. 2010;5:73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Pantanowitz L, Hornish M, Goulart R. The impact of digital imaging in the field of cytopathology. Cyto J. 2009;6(1):6.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Foster K. Medical education in the digital age: digital whole slide imaging as an e-learning tool. J Pathol Inform. 2010;1:14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Heidger PM Jr, Dee F, Consoer D, Leaven T, Duncan J, Kreiter C. Integrated approach to teaching and testing in histology with real and virtual imaging. Anat Rec. 2002;269(2):107–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kang HP, Hagenkord JM, Monzon FA, Parwani AV. Residency training in pathology informatics: a virtual rotation solution. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132(3):404–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. 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 

  53. Weinstein RS, Graham AR, Richter LC, Barker GP, Krupinski EA, Lopez AM, et al. Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: prospects for the future. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(8):1057–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Daniel C, Garcia Rojo M, Bourquard K, Henin D, Schrader T, Della Mea V, et al. Standards to support information systems integration in anatomic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(11):1841–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Eversole GM, Moriarty AT, Schwartz MR, Clayton AC, Souers R, Fatheree LA, et al. Practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in cervicovaginal cytology, 2006. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(3):331–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Gagnon M, Inhorn S, Hancock J, Keller B, Carpenter D, Merlin T, et al. Comparison of cytology proficiency testing: glass slides vs. virtual slides. Acta Cytol. 2004;48(6):788–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Wilbur DC, Black-Schaffer WS, Luff RD, Abraham KP, Kemper C, Molina JT, et al. The Becton Dickinson focal point GS imaging system: clinical trials demonstrate significantly improved sensitivity for the detection of important cervical lesions. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132(5):767–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Marchevsky AM, Khurana R, Thomas P, Scharre K, Farias P, Bose S. The use of virtual microscopy for proficiency testing in gynecologic cytopathology: a feasibility study using ScanScope. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130(3):349–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Kalinski T, Sel S, Hofmann H, Zwönitzer R, Bernarding J, Roessner A. Digital workflow management for quality assessment in pathology. Pathol Res Pract. 2008;204(1):17–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Allen KA. Evaluation methods for assessing cytotechnology students' screening skills. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23(1):66–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Raab SS, Nakhleh RE, Ruby SC. Patient safety in anatomic pathology: measuring discrepancy frequencies and causes. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129(4):459–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Stewart Iii J, Miyazaki K, Bevans-Wilkins K, Ye C, Kurtycz DFI, Selvaggi SM. Virtual microscopy for cytology proficiency testing: are we there yet? Cancer. 2007;111(4):203–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Marsan C. Quality control in cytopathology applied to screening for cervical carcinoma. Pol J Pathol. 1995;46(4):245–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Archondakis S, Georgoulakis J, Stamataki M, Anninos D, Skagias L, Panayiotides I, et al. Telecytology: a tool for quality assessment and improvement in the evaluation of thyroid fine-needle aspiration specimens. Telemed e-Health. 2009;15(7):713–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Marchevsky AM, Wan Y, Thomas P, Krishnan L, Evans-Simon H, Haber H. Virtual microscopy as a tool for proficiency testing in cytopathology: a model using multiple digital images of Papanicolaou tests. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003;127(10):1320–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Pantanowitz L. Leveraging digital pathology for molecular testing. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018;12:965–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. El-Gabry EA, Parwani AV, Pantanowitz L. Whole-slide imaging: widening the scope of cytopathology. Diag Histopathol. 2014;20(12):456–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA

    Zaibo Li

  2. Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Liron Pantanowitz

Authors
  1. Zaibo Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Liron Pantanowitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zaibo Li .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical School, Columbus, OH, USA

    Anil V. Parwani

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Li, Z., Pantanowitz, L. (2022). Whole Slide Imaging in Cytopathology. In: Parwani, A.V. (eds) Whole Slide Imaging. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83332-9_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83332-9_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-83331-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-83332-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation