Cargando…

The Nomadic Digital Pathologist. Validation of a simple, dual slide scanner with remote reporting for a regional upper gastrointestinal specialist multidisciplinary meeting

Background: This article describes how a simple slide scanner with remote viewing software enabled a remote “nomadic” pathologist to continue his role as specialist lead for a regional gastrointestinal multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) after relocating to another site in the 5 hospital Southwest...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Bracey, Tim S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9747508/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36523609
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpi.2022.100161
Descripción
Sumario:Background: This article describes how a simple slide scanner with remote viewing software enabled a remote “nomadic” pathologist to continue his role as specialist lead for a regional gastrointestinal multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) after relocating to another site in the 5 hospital Southwest UK Peninsula cancer network just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods: The author used digital pathology (DP) to supplement a conventional workflow as a way of minimising delay in reporting and reviewing slides for a regional specialist Oesophagogastric MDTM (the OGSMDT). The specialist centre at University Hospital Plymouth (UHP) is 58 miles from the author’s new workplace at Royal Cornwall Hospital (RCHT). Slides from the 44 cases (10% of this specialist annual workload) in this validation study were reported or reviewed digitally using the slide scanner. All were listed for the OGSMDT due to being clinically suspicious for upper gastrointestinal malignancy, having been processed at UHP, or one of the other hospitals in the cancer network. Results: The scanner allowed the author who was only on site at UHP 1 day per week to prevent delays in reporting/reviewing glass slides, using remote DP. Confidence in digital diagnosis was assessed using the Royal College of Pathologists recommendations. The author was the primary pathologist signing out 31, and second opinion for the remaining 13 cases. These comprised a mixture of biopsies as well as endoscopic and surgical excision specimens. The DP system enabled the author to report the cases digitally with an equivalent degree of confidence to glass slides and no significant discrepancies were identified between the author’s digital and final glass slide diagnosis. Conclusions: The scanner was found to be safe and effective for remote reporting and review for OGSMDT cases. It was recognised that DP was advantageous to enable this role to continue remotely but that a fully integrated digital reporting system capable of high-capacity scanning would be preferable to the simple system used.