Objective: To assess the application of TeleCyP for real-time fine-needle aspiration interpretation (RFI) necessary for case management and specimen triage. Study Design: Twenty-two endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided mediastinal and pulmonary cases were included in the learning phase to determine the time and efficiency of TeleCyP. Slides were scanned by a cytopathology fellow in real time, and high-speed transmitted images over a secure network were interpreted by a cytopathologist while maintaining audio communication. In the validation phase, an additional 38 pancreas cases from endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were evaluated recapitulating the RFI scenario from the learning phase. The cytopathologist was blinded to the results of the diagnosis in both phases. Results: The time to provide assessment of specimen adequacy and a preliminary diagnosis was 53 s in the learning phase and 49 s in the validation phase. There was 100% correlation between RFI and TeleCyP assessment for specimen adequacy. TeleCyP particularly posed challenges in providing definitive interpretation on EUS-fine-needle aspiration of some of the pancreatic solid masses (11%, 4/36). Conclusion: TeleCyP can serve as a powerful alternative, time-efficient strategy to provide RFI, and for specimen triaging which is critical for personalized medicine and patient management.

Keywords:
Real time, Interpretation, FNA adequacy, Telepathology, Telecytopathology, Telecytology, TeleCyP, Endoscopic ultrasound, Endobronchial ultrasound, Pancreas
1.
Weinstein RS, Bloom KJ, Rozek LS: Telepathology and the networking of pathology diagnostic services. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1987;111:646–652.
2.
Leung S, Kaplan K: Medicolegal aspects of telepathology. Hum Pathol 2009;40:1137–1142.
3.
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;40:1070–1081.
4.
Winokur TS, McClellan S, Siegal GP, Redden D, Gore P, Lazenby A, et al: A prospective trial of telepathology for intraoperative consultation (frozen sections). Hum Pathol 2000;31:781–785.
5.
Gould PV, Saikali S: A comparison of digitized frozen section and smear preparations for intraoperative neurotelepathology. Anal Cell Pathol (Amst) 2011, E-pub ahead of print.
6.
Wilbur DC: Digital cytology: current state of the art and prospects for the future. Acta Cytologica 2011;55:227–238.
7.
Galvez J, Howell L, Costa MJ, Davis R: Diagnostic concordance of telecytology and conventional cytology for evaluating breast aspirates. Acta Cytol 1998;42:663–667.
8.
Marchevsky AM, Nelson V, Martin SE, Greaves TS, Raza AS, Zeineh J, et al: Telecytology of fine-needle aspiration biopsies of the pancreas: a study of well-differentiated adenocarcinoma and chronic pancreatitis with atypical epithelial repair changes. Diagn Cytopathol 2003;28:147–152.
9.
Yamashiro K, Kawamura N, Matsubayashi S, Dota K, Suzuki H, Mizushima H, et al: Telecytology in Hokkaido Island, Japan: results of primary telecytodiagnosis of routine cases. Cytopathology 2004;15:221–227.
10.
Ayatollahi H, Khoei A, Mohammadian N, Sadeghian MH, Azari JB, Ghaemi MR, et al: Telemedicine in diagnostic pleural cytology: a feasibility study between universities in Iran and the USA. J Telemed Telecare 2007;13:363–368.
11.
Eichhorn JH, Buckner L, Buckner SB, Beech DP, Harris KA, McClure DJ, et al: Internet-based gynecologic telecytology with remote automated image selection: results of a first-phase developmental trial. Am J Clin Pathol 2008;129:686–696.
12.
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;130:349–355.
13.
Khalbuss WE, Pantanowitz L, Parwani AV: Digital imaging in cytopathology. Pathol Res Int 2011;2011:264683.
14.
Frost JK: Television microscopy for education and consultation in pathology via coaxial cable, laser beam and COMSAT satellite. Pathologist 1979;33:605–609.
15.
Jhala NC, Jhala DN, Chhieng DC, Eloubeidi MA, Eltoum IA: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a cytopathologist’s perspective. Am J Clin Pathol 2003;120:351–367.
16.
Zhang S, Defrias DV, Alasadi R, Nayar R: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA): experience of an academic centre in the USA. Cytopathology 2010;21:35–43.
17.
Raut CP, Grau AM, Staerkel GA, Kaw M, Tamm EP, Wolff RA, et al: Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with presumed pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7:118–126, discussion 127–128.
18.
Eltoum IA, Chhieng DC, Jhala D, Jhala NC, Crowe DR, Varadarajulu S, et al: Cumulative sum procedure in evaluation of EUS-guided FNA cytology: the learning curve and diagnostic performance beyond sensitivity and specificity. Cytopathology 2007;18:143–150.
19.
Nasuti JF, Gupta PK, Baloch ZW: Diagnostic value and cost-effectiveness of on-site evaluation of fine-needle aspiration specimens: review of 5,688 cases. Diagn Cytopathol 2002;27:1–4.
20.
Layfield LJ, Bentz JS, Gopez EV: Immediate on-site interpretation of fine-needle aspiration smears: a cost and compensation analysis. Cancer 2001;93:319–322.
21.
Yamashiro K, Taira K, Matsubayashi S, Azuma M, Okuyama D, Nakajima M, et al: Comparison between a traditional single still image and a multiframe video image along the z-axis of the same microscopic field of interest in cytology: which does contribute to telecytology? Diagn Cytopathol 2009;37:727–731.
22.
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;118:119–126.
23.
Kim B, Chhieng DC, Crowe DR, Jhala D, Jhala N, Winokur T, et al: Dynamic telecytopathology of on site rapid cytology diagnoses for pancreatic carcinoma. Cytojournal 2006;3:27.
24.
Briscoe D, Adair CF, Thompson LD, Tellado MV, Buckner SB, Rosenthal DL, et al: Telecytologic diagnosis of breast fine needle aspiration biopsies. Intraobserver concordance. Acta Cytologica 2000;44:175–180.
25.
Heimann A, Maini G, Hwang S, Shroyer KR, Singh M: Use of telecytology for the immediate assessment of CT guided and endoscopic FNA cytology: diagnostic accuracy, advantages, and pitfalls. Diagn Cytopathol 2010, E-pub ahead of print.
26.
van Eijk R, Licht J, Schrumpf M, Talebian Yazdi M, Ruano D, Forte GI, et al: Rapid KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA mutation analysis of fine needle aspirates from non-small-cell lung cancer using allele-specific qPCR. PLoS One 2011;63:e17791.
27.
Gleeson FC, Kipp BR, Caudill JL, Clain JE, Clayton AC, Halling KC, et al: False positive endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration cytology: incidence and risk factors. Gut 2010;59:586–593.
28.
Siddiqui AA, Kowalski TE, Shahid H, O’donnell S, Tolin J, Loren D, et al: False positive EUS-guided FNA cytology for solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;74:535–540.
29.
Jarboe EA, Layfield LJ: Cytologic features of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and pancreatitis: potential pitfalls in the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal carcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:575–581.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.