Abstract
Background: The iPath telemedicine platform Basel is mainly used for histological and cytological consultations, but also serves as a valuable learning tool. Aim: To study the level of accuracy in making diagnoses based on still images achieved by experienced cytopathologists, to identify limiting factors, and to provide a cytological image series as a learning set. Method: Images from 167 consecutive cytological specimens of different origin were uploaded on the iPath platform and evaluated by four cytopathologists. Only wet-fixed and well-stained specimens were used. The consultants made specific diagnoses and categorized each as benign, suspicious or malignant. Results: For all consultants, specificity and sensitivity regarding categorized diagnoses were 83-92 and 85-93%, respectively; the overall accuracy was 88-90%. The interobserver agreement was substantial (κ = 0.791). The lowest rate of concordance was achieved in urine and bladder washings and in the identification of benign lesions. Conclusion: Using a digital image set for diagnostic purposes implies that even under optimal conditions the accuracy rate will not exceed to 80-90%, mainly because of lacking supportive immunocytochemical or molecular tests. This limitation does not disqualify digital images for teleconsulting or as a learning aid. The series of images used for the study are open to the public at http://pathorama.wordpress.com/extragenital-cytology-2013/.
References
1.
Oberholzer M, et al: Telepathology: frozen section diagnosis at a distance. Virchows Arch 1995;426:3-9.
2.
Halliday BE, et al: Diagnostic accuracy of an international static-imaging telepathology consultation service. Hum Pathol 1997;28:17-21.
3.
Cross SS, et al: Offline telepathology diagnosis of colorectal polyps: a study of interobserver agreement and comparison with glass slide diagnoses. J Clin Pathol 2002;55:305-312.
4.
Abdirad A, et al: Static telepathology in cancer institute of Tehran university: report of the first academic experience in Iran. Diagn Pathol 2006;1:33.
5.
Demichelis F, et al: Robotic telepathology for intraoperative remote diagnosis using a still-imaging-based system. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:744-752.
6.
Williams S, et al: Telepathology for patient care: what am I getting myself into? Adv Anat Path 2010;17:130-149.
7.
Kldiashvili E, Schrader T: Reproducibility of telecytology diagnosis of cervical smears in a quality assurance program: the Georgian experience. Telemed J E Health 2010;17:565-568.
8.
Alli PM, et al: Telecytology: intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of cervical-vaginal smears. Hum Pathol 2001;32:1318-1322.
9.
Lee ES, et al: Accuracy and reproducibility of telecytology diagnosis of cervical smears: a tool for quality assurance programs. Am J Clin Pathol 2003;119:356-360.
10.
Eichhorn JH, 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.
11.
Pinco J, et al: Impact of digital image manipulation in cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009;133:57-61.
12.
Kerr SE, et al: Initial assessment of fine-needle aspiration specimens by telepathology: validation for use in pathology resident-faculty consultations. Am J Clin Pathol 2008;130:409-413.
13.
Yamashiro K, et al: Telecytology in Hokkaido Island, Japan: results of primary telecytodiagnosis of routine cases. Cytopathology 2004;15:221-227.
14.
Marchevsky AM, 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.
15.
Archondakis S, et al: Telecytology: a tool for quality assessment and improvement in the evaluation of thyroid fine-needle aspiration specimens. Telemed J E Health 2009;15:713-717.
16.
Georgoulakis J, et al: Study on the reproducibility of thyroid lesions telecytology diagnoses based upon digitized images. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:495-499.
17.
Mostafa GM, et al: Telecytological diagnosis of space-occupying lesions of the liver. Acta Cytol 2014;58:174-181.
18.
Glatz K, et al: An international telecytologic quiz on urinary cytology reveals educational deficits and absence of a commonly used classification system. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;126:294-301.
19.
Alsharif M, et al: Telecytopathology for immediate evaluation of fine-needle aspiration specimens. Cancer Cytopathol 2010;118:119-126.
20.
Heimann A, et al: Use of telecytology for the immediate assessment of CT guided and endoscopic FNA cytology: diagnostic accuracy, advantages, and pitfalls. Diagn Cytopathol 2012;40:575-581.
21.
O'Brien MJ, et al: Digital imagery/telecytology. International Academy of Cytology Task Force summary: diagnostic cytology towards the 21st Century: an international expert conference and tutorial. Acta Cytol 1998;42:148-164.
22.
Wilbur DC: Digital cytology: current state of the art and prospects for the future. Acta Cytol 2011;55:227-238.
23.
Brauchli K, et al: The future of telepathology: an Internet ‘distributed system' with ‘open standards' (in German). Pathologe 2002;23:198-206.
24.
Brauchli K, et al: Diagnostic telepathology: long-term experience of a single institution. Virchows Arch 2004;444:403-409.
25.
Hitchcock CL: The future of telepathology for the developing world. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011;135:211-214.
26.
Bubendorf L, et al: Multiprobe FISH for enhanced detection of bladder cancer in voided urine specimens and bladder washings. Am J Clin Path 2001;116:79-86.
27.
Ayatollahi H, et al: Telemedicine in diagnostic pleural cytology: a feasibility study between universities in Iran and the USA. J Telemed Telecare 2007;13:363-368.
28.
Allen EA, et al: Characteristics of a telecytology consultation service. Hum Pathol 2001;32:1323-1326.
29.
Weinstein RS, et al: Telepathology overview: from concept to implementation. Hum Pathol 2001;32:1283-1299.
30.
Renshaw AA, et al: Distinguishing small cell carcinoma from non-small cell carcinoma of the lung: correlating cytologic features and performance in the College of American Pathologists Non-Gynecologic Cytology Program. Arch Path Lab Med 2005;129:619-623.
31.
Hughes JH, et al: Pitfalls in salivary gland fine-needle aspiration cytology: lessons from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology. Arch Path Lab Med 2005;129:26-31.
32.
Hughes JH, et al: Fine-needle aspiration of pulmonary hamartoma: a common source of false-positive diagnoses in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology. Arch Path Lab Med 2005;129:19-22.
33.
Laucirica R, et al: Do liquid-based preparations of urinary cytology perform differently than classically prepared cases? Observations from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology. Arch Path Lab Med 2010;134:19-22.
34.
Young NA, et al: Diagnosis and subclassification of breast carcinoma by fine-needle aspiration biopsy: results of the interlaboratory comparison program in non-gynecologic cytopathology. Arch Path Lab Med 2002;126:1453-1457.
35.
Moriarty AT, et al: Fluids - good and bad actors: observations from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology. Arch Path Lab Med 2004;128:513-518.
36.
Dietel M, Hufnagl P: The UICC telepathology consultation center (International Union against Cancer): a global approach to improving consultation for pathologists in cancer diagnosis. Cancer 2000;89:187-191.
37.
Laucirica R, et al: Performance characteristics of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma of the breast in fine-needle aspirates: observations from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytopathology. Arch Path Lab Med 2011;135:1533-1538.
38.
Young NA, et al: Misinterpretation of normal cellular elements in fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens: observations from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Non-Gynecologic Cytopathology. Arch Path Lab Med 2002;126:670-675.
39.
Paez A, et al: Reliability of the routine cytological diagnosis in bladder cancer. Eur Urol 1999;35:228-232.
40.
Kldiashvili E, Schrader T: Reproducibility of telecytology diagnosis of cervical smears in a quality assurance program: the Georgian experience. Telemed J E Health 2011;17:565-568.
41.
Briscoe D, et al: Telecytologic diagnosis of breast fine needle aspiration biopsies: intraobserver concordance. Acta Cytol 2000;44:175-180.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
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.
