Validation of Whole-slide Digitally Imaged Melanocytic Lesions: Does Z-Stack Scanning Improve Diagnostic Accuracy?
Melanoma
validation
whole-slide image
whole-slide imaging
z-stack
Journal
Journal of pathology informatics
ISSN: 2229-5089
Titre abrégé: J Pathol Inform
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101528849
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
11
07
2018
accepted:
17
12
2018
entrez:
12
4
2019
pubmed:
12
4
2019
medline:
12
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Accurate diagnosis of melanocytic lesions is challenging, even for expert pathologists. Nowadays, whole-slide imaging (WSI) is used for routine clinical pathology diagnosis in several laboratories. One of the limitations of WSI, as it is most often used, is the lack of a multiplanar focusing option. In this study, we aim to establish the diagnostic accuracy of WSI for melanocytic lesions and investigate the potential accuracy increase of z-stack scanning. Z-stack enables pathologists to use a software focus adjustment, comparable to the fine-focus knob of a conventional light microscope. Melanocytic lesions ( An expert consensus diagnosis was achieved in 99 (97%) of cases. Concordance rates between surgical pathologists and the ground truth varied between 75% and 90%, excluding nevoid melanoma cases. Concordance rates of nevoid melanoma varied between 10% and 80%. Pathologists used the software focusing option in 7%-28% of cases, which in 1 case of nevoid melanoma resulted in correcting a misdiagnosis after finding a dermal mitosis. Diagnostic accuracy of melanocytic lesions based on glass slides and WSI is comparable with previous publications. A large variability in diagnostic accuracy of nevoid melanoma does exist. Our results show that z-stack scanning, in general, does not increase the diagnostic accuracy of melanocytic.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Accurate diagnosis of melanocytic lesions is challenging, even for expert pathologists. Nowadays, whole-slide imaging (WSI) is used for routine clinical pathology diagnosis in several laboratories. One of the limitations of WSI, as it is most often used, is the lack of a multiplanar focusing option. In this study, we aim to establish the diagnostic accuracy of WSI for melanocytic lesions and investigate the potential accuracy increase of z-stack scanning. Z-stack enables pathologists to use a software focus adjustment, comparable to the fine-focus knob of a conventional light microscope.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Melanocytic lesions (
RESULTS
RESULTS
An expert consensus diagnosis was achieved in 99 (97%) of cases. Concordance rates between surgical pathologists and the ground truth varied between 75% and 90%, excluding nevoid melanoma cases. Concordance rates of nevoid melanoma varied between 10% and 80%. Pathologists used the software focusing option in 7%-28% of cases, which in 1 case of nevoid melanoma resulted in correcting a misdiagnosis after finding a dermal mitosis.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Diagnostic accuracy of melanocytic lesions based on glass slides and WSI is comparable with previous publications. A large variability in diagnostic accuracy of nevoid melanoma does exist. Our results show that z-stack scanning, in general, does not increase the diagnostic accuracy of melanocytic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30972225
doi: 10.4103/jpi.jpi_46_18
pii: S2153-3539(22)00369-8
pmc: PMC6415522
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
6Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
Am J Dermatopathol. 2006 Oct;28(5):413-6
pubmed: 17012916
Hum Pathol. 2008 Sep;39(9):1341-9
pubmed: 18614200
Am J Clin Pathol. 2008 Aug;130(2):259-64
pubmed: 18628096
Histopathology. 2010 Jan;56(1):100-11
pubmed: 20055908
Am J Surg Pathol. 2010 Mar;34(3):314-26
pubmed: 20118771
Hum Pathol. 2010 Dec;41(12):1770-6
pubmed: 20869750
J Clin Pathol. 2012 Feb;65(2):152-8
pubmed: 22031590
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013 Dec;137(12):1710-22
pubmed: 23634907
Histopathology. 2014 Mar;64(4):602-4
pubmed: 24107125
Histopathology. 2016 Jun;68(7):1063-72
pubmed: 26409165
J Digit Imaging. 2016 Apr;29(2):243-53
pubmed: 26546178
J Pathol Inform. 2015 Sep 28;6:52
pubmed: 26605117
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Aug;75(2):356-63
pubmed: 27189823
J Pathol Inform. 2016 May 04;7:25
pubmed: 27217975
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017 Jan;141(1):151-161
pubmed: 27399211
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Dec;75(6):1229-1237
pubmed: 27742174
Cancer Cytopathol. 2017 Sep;125(9):701-709
pubmed: 28558124
BMJ. 2017 Jun 28;357:j2813
pubmed: 28659278
J Clin Oncol. 1996 Apr;14(4):1218-23
pubmed: 8648377