{"title":"Viability of Whole-Slide Imaging for Intraoperative Touch Imprint Cytological Diagnosis of Axillary Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer Patients","authors":"Fei Ren, Huange Li, Wentao Yang, Ying Chen, Yuwei Zheng, Hao Zhang, Shuling Zhou, Bo Ping, Peng Shi, Xiaochun Wan, Yanli Wang","doi":"10.1002/dc.25401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>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.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>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).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>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.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>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.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11349,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic Cytopathology","volume":"53 1","pages":"18-26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dc.25401","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic Cytopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dc.25401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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.
期刊介绍:
Diagnostic Cytopathology is intended to provide a forum for the exchange of information in the field of cytopathology, with special emphasis on the practical, clinical aspects of the discipline. The editors invite original scientific articles, as well as special review articles, feature articles, and letters to the editor, from laboratory professionals engaged in the practice of cytopathology. Manuscripts are accepted for publication on the basis of scientific merit, practical significance, and suitability for publication in a journal dedicated to this discipline. Original articles can be considered only with the understanding that they have never been published before and that they have not been submitted for simultaneous review to another publication.