A Systematic Analysis of Discordant Diagnoses in Digital Pathology Compared With Light Microscopy
Abstract
CONTEXT: - Relatively little is known about the significance and potential impact of glass-digital discordances, and this is likely to be of importance when considering digital pathology adoption.
OBJECTIVE: - To apply evidence-based medicine to collect and analyze reported instances of glass-digital discordance from the whole slide imaging validation literature.
DESIGN: - We used our prior systematic review protocol to identify studies assessing the concordance of light microscopy and whole slide imaging between 1999 and 2015. Data were extracted and analyzed by a team of histopathologists to classify the type, significance, and potential root cause of discordances.
RESULTS: - Twenty-three studies were included, yielding 8069 instances of a glass diagnosis being compared with a digital diagnosis. From these 8069 comparisons, 335 instances of discordance (4%) were reported, in which glass was the preferred diagnostic medium in 286 (85%), and digital in 44 (13%), with no consensus in 5 (2%). Twenty-eight discordances had the potential to cause moderate/severe patient harm. Of these, glass was the preferred diagnostic medium for 26 (93%). Of the 335 discordances, 109 (32%) involved the diagnosis or grading of dysplasia. For these cases, glass was the preferred diagnostic medium in 101 cases (93%), suggesting that diagnosis and grading of dysplasia may be a potential pitfall of digital diagnosis. In 32 of 335 cases (10%), discordance on digital was attributed to the inability…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Preliminary Toxicity Analysis of 3DCRT versus IMRT on the High Dose Arm of the RTOG 0126 Prostate Cancer Trial
- Adaptive Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Initial Clinical Outcomes from a Prospective Trial
- American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 263: Standardizing Nomenclatures in Radiation Oncology
- Motion Management Strategies and Technical Issues Associated with Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Thoracic and Upper Abdominal Tumors: A Review from NRG Oncology
- High-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy as a monotherapy for localized prostate cancer: treatment description and preliminary results of a phase I/II clinical trial
- Highly efficient training, refinement, and validation of a knowledge-based plan quality control system for radiotherapy clinical trials
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.