We have located links that may give you full text access.
Viability of Whole-Slide Imaging for Intraoperative Touch Imprint Cytological Diagnosis of Axillary Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer Patients.
Diagnostic Cytopathology 2024 August 29
BACKGROUND: Whole-slide imaging (WSI) is a promising tool in pathology. However, the use of WSI in cytopathology has lagged behind that in histology. We aimed to evaluate the utility of WSI for the intraoperative touch imprint cytological diagnosis of axillary sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in breast cancer patients.
METHODS: Glass slides from touch imprint cytology of 480 axillary SLNs were scanned using two different WSI scanners. The intra- and interobserver concordance, accuracy, possible reasons for misdiagnosis, scanning time, and review time for three cytopathologists were compared between WSI and light microscopy (LM).
RESULTS: A total of 4320 diagnoses were obtained. There was substantial to strong intraobserver concordance when comparing reads among paired LM slides and WSI digital slides (κ coefficient ranged from 0.63 to 0.88, and concordance rates ranged from 94.58% to 98.33%). Substantial to strong interobserver agreement was also observed among the three cytopathologists (κ coefficient ranged from 0.67 to 0.85, and concordance rates ranged from 95.42% to 97.92%). The accuracy of LM was slightly higher (average of 98.06%) than that of WSI (averages of 96.81% and 97.78%). The majority of misdiagnoses were false negative diagnoses due to the following top three causes: few cancer cells, confusing cancer cells with histiocytes, and confusing cancer cells with lymphocytes.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to address the feasibility of WSI in touch imprint cytology. The use of WSI for intraoperative touch imprint cytological diagnosis of SLNs is a practical option when experienced staff are not available on-site.
METHODS: Glass slides from touch imprint cytology of 480 axillary SLNs were scanned using two different WSI scanners. The intra- and interobserver concordance, accuracy, possible reasons for misdiagnosis, scanning time, and review time for three cytopathologists were compared between WSI and light microscopy (LM).
RESULTS: A total of 4320 diagnoses were obtained. There was substantial to strong intraobserver concordance when comparing reads among paired LM slides and WSI digital slides (κ coefficient ranged from 0.63 to 0.88, and concordance rates ranged from 94.58% to 98.33%). Substantial to strong interobserver agreement was also observed among the three cytopathologists (κ coefficient ranged from 0.67 to 0.85, and concordance rates ranged from 95.42% to 97.92%). The accuracy of LM was slightly higher (average of 98.06%) than that of WSI (averages of 96.81% and 97.78%). The majority of misdiagnoses were false negative diagnoses due to the following top three causes: few cancer cells, confusing cancer cells with histiocytes, and confusing cancer cells with lymphocytes.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to address the feasibility of WSI in touch imprint cytology. The use of WSI for intraoperative touch imprint cytological diagnosis of SLNs is a practical option when experienced staff are not available on-site.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Novel Insights into Diabetic Kidney Disease.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 September 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app