Inking cell blocks improves scanner detection for diagnosis in pathology.
cell block
cytology
digital pathology
inking
scanning
Journal
Diagnostic cytopathology
ISSN: 1097-0339
Titre abrégé: Diagn Cytopathol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8506895
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
revised:
06
09
2023
received:
15
05
2023
accepted:
07
09
2023
medline:
2
11
2023
pubmed:
19
9
2023
entrez:
19
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cell blocks may be hard to be totally automatically detected by the scanner (ADS), generating incomplete whole slide images (WSIs), with areas that are not scanned, leading to possible false negative diagnosis. The aim of this study is to test if inking the cell blocks helps increasing ADS. Test 1: 15 cell blocks were sectioned, one half inked black (1HB) and the other inked green (1HG). Each of the halves was individually processed to generate a WSI stained by the H&E. 1HBs and 1HGs had similar scanning time (median 59 s vs. 65 s, p = .126) and file sizes (median 382 Mb vs. 381 Mb, p = .567). The black ink interfered less in the observation (2.2% vs. 44.4%; p < .001) than in the green one. Test 2: 15 cell blocks were sectioned, one half inked black (2HB) and the other left unstained/null (2HN). Each of the halves was individually processed to generate three WSIs-one HE, one periodic-acid Schiff (PAS), and one immunostained by cytokeratin AE1&AE3 (CKAE1AE3). HE and PAS WSIs from both 2HN and 2HB groups were all totally ADS and had similar scanning times and file sizes. Concerning immunostaining with CKAE1AE3: ADS (46.7% vs. 93.3%; p = .014), median time for scanning (57 s vs. 83 s; p < .001) and file size (178 Mb vs. 338 Mb; p < .001) were reduced significantly in the 2HN group in comparison with the 2HB. Although increasing scanning time and file size, inking the cell blocks helps increasing ADS after immunostaining, improving the safety and efficiency of the digital pathology workflow.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
779-785Informations de copyright
© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Krogerus L, Kholova I. Cell block in cytological diagnostics: review of preparatory techniques. Acta Cytol. 2018;62(4):237-243. doi:10.1159/000489769
Puga FM, Rodrigues M, Eloy C. Usefulness of cellblock preparation in fine needle aspiration for the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. Diagn Cytopathol. 2022;50(9):419-423. doi:10.1002/dc.24996
Eloy C, Vale J, Curado M, et al. Digital pathology workflow implementation at IPATIMUP. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(11):1-11. doi:10.3390/diagnostics11112111
Pinto DG, Bychkov A, Tsuyama N, Fukuoka J, Eloy C. Exploring the adoption of digital pathology in clinical settings - insights from a cross-continent study. medRxiv. 2023;1-21. doi:10.1101/2023.04.03.23288066
Eccher A, Girolami I. Current state of whole slide imaging use in cytopathology: pros and pitfalls. Cytopathology. 2020;31(5):372-378. doi:10.1111/cyt.12806
Satturwar S, Monaco SE, Xing J, Pantanowitz L. The utility of cell blocks for international cytopathology teleconsultation by whole slide imaging. Cytopathology. 2020;31(5):419-425. doi:10.1111/cyt.12800
Patel AU, Shaker N, Erck S, et al. Types and frequency of whole slide imaging scan failures in a clinical high throughput digital pathology scanning laboratory. J Pathol Inform. 2022;13:100112. doi:10.1016/j.jpi.2022.100112
Fraggetta F, L'Imperio V, Ameisen D, et al. Best practice recommendations for the implementation of a digital pathology workflow in the anatomic pathology laboratory by the European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP). Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(11):1-20. doi:10.3390/diagnostics11112167
Evans AJ, Brown RW, Bui MM, et al. Validating whole slide imaging systems for diagnostic purposes in pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2022;146(4):440-450. doi:10.5858/arpa.2020-0723-CP