Live remote digital microscopy in peripheral blood smear evaluation

Intraobserver concordance and experience

Diana M. Haninger, Mehdi Nassiri, Elizabeth D. Settembre, Shanxiang Zhang, Jiehao Zhou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: Peripheral blood smear (PBS) review is a routine laboratory test which requires pathologist's interpretation when abnormal indices, atypical cells, or critical findings are identified. Real-time remote digital microscopy (DM) can potentially facilitate rapid review when an on-site pathologist is not available. Herein, we assess intraobserver concordance of PBS evaluation with light microscopy (LM) and DM using VisionTek M6 robotic DM and TeamViewer imaging software. Methods: Thirty-seven de-identified PBS slides were evaluated by five reviewers. Slides were loaded on a VisionTek M6 robotic microscope at an off-site laboratory and evaluated remotely via TeamViewer software. Reviewers recorded interpretation, time required for interpretation (in minutes), imaging quality (score 0-3), and confidence of interpretation (score 0-3). Other relevant information associated with DM evaluation was also documented. Slides were subsequently evaluated using LM after washout interval. The intraobserver variation of results for impression, digital slide quality, minutes to interpretation, and confidence of interpretation was compared between DM and LM. Results: The intraobserver concordance between LM and DM was 93%, with nine discordant interpretations among 135 evaluations under each review modality, respectively. Although reviewers spent more time under DM mode (5 min/slide) than LM mode (2.5 min/slide), the reviewers felt the DM provided sufficient image quality and the confidence levels of reviewers on slide interpretation were comparable between DM (2.6/3) and LM (2.8/3). Conclusion: There was a high level of intraobserver concordance and comparable interpretation confidence between DM and LM. DM can be a useful methodology for off-site pathologist's review of PBS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)740-746
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal of Laboratory Hematology
Volume40
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2018

Fingerprint

Microscopy
Microscopic examination
Blood
Optical microscopy
Light
Robotics
Imaging techniques
Software
Image quality
Microscopes
Observer Variation

Keywords

  • concordance
  • digital microscopy
  • peripheral blood smear
  • telepathology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hematology
  • Clinical Biochemistry
  • Biochemistry, medical

Cite this

Live remote digital microscopy in peripheral blood smear evaluation : Intraobserver concordance and experience. / Haninger, Diana M.; Nassiri, Mehdi; Settembre, Elizabeth D.; Zhang, Shanxiang; Zhou, Jiehao.

In: International Journal of Laboratory Hematology, Vol. 40, No. 6, 01.12.2018, p. 740-746.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Haninger, Diana M. ; Nassiri, Mehdi ; Settembre, Elizabeth D. ; Zhang, Shanxiang ; Zhou, Jiehao. / Live remote digital microscopy in peripheral blood smear evaluation : Intraobserver concordance and experience. In: International Journal of Laboratory Hematology. 2018 ; Vol. 40, No. 6. pp. 740-746.
@article{3a3de9c9be9f40479e6c4708760001ea,
title = "Live remote digital microscopy in peripheral blood smear evaluation: Intraobserver concordance and experience",
abstract = "Introduction: Peripheral blood smear (PBS) review is a routine laboratory test which requires pathologist's interpretation when abnormal indices, atypical cells, or critical findings are identified. Real-time remote digital microscopy (DM) can potentially facilitate rapid review when an on-site pathologist is not available. Herein, we assess intraobserver concordance of PBS evaluation with light microscopy (LM) and DM using VisionTek M6 robotic DM and TeamViewer imaging software. Methods: Thirty-seven de-identified PBS slides were evaluated by five reviewers. Slides were loaded on a VisionTek M6 robotic microscope at an off-site laboratory and evaluated remotely via TeamViewer software. Reviewers recorded interpretation, time required for interpretation (in minutes), imaging quality (score 0-3), and confidence of interpretation (score 0-3). Other relevant information associated with DM evaluation was also documented. Slides were subsequently evaluated using LM after washout interval. The intraobserver variation of results for impression, digital slide quality, minutes to interpretation, and confidence of interpretation was compared between DM and LM. Results: The intraobserver concordance between LM and DM was 93{\%}, with nine discordant interpretations among 135 evaluations under each review modality, respectively. Although reviewers spent more time under DM mode (5 min/slide) than LM mode (2.5 min/slide), the reviewers felt the DM provided sufficient image quality and the confidence levels of reviewers on slide interpretation were comparable between DM (2.6/3) and LM (2.8/3). Conclusion: There was a high level of intraobserver concordance and comparable interpretation confidence between DM and LM. DM can be a useful methodology for off-site pathologist's review of PBS.",
keywords = "concordance, digital microscopy, peripheral blood smear, telepathology",
author = "Haninger, {Diana M.} and Mehdi Nassiri and Settembre, {Elizabeth D.} and Shanxiang Zhang and Jiehao Zhou",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/ijlh.12914",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "740--746",
journal = "International Journal of Laboratory Hematology",
issn = "1751-5521",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Live remote digital microscopy in peripheral blood smear evaluation

T2 - Intraobserver concordance and experience

AU - Haninger, Diana M.

AU - Nassiri, Mehdi

AU - Settembre, Elizabeth D.

AU - Zhang, Shanxiang

AU - Zhou, Jiehao

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - Introduction: Peripheral blood smear (PBS) review is a routine laboratory test which requires pathologist's interpretation when abnormal indices, atypical cells, or critical findings are identified. Real-time remote digital microscopy (DM) can potentially facilitate rapid review when an on-site pathologist is not available. Herein, we assess intraobserver concordance of PBS evaluation with light microscopy (LM) and DM using VisionTek M6 robotic DM and TeamViewer imaging software. Methods: Thirty-seven de-identified PBS slides were evaluated by five reviewers. Slides were loaded on a VisionTek M6 robotic microscope at an off-site laboratory and evaluated remotely via TeamViewer software. Reviewers recorded interpretation, time required for interpretation (in minutes), imaging quality (score 0-3), and confidence of interpretation (score 0-3). Other relevant information associated with DM evaluation was also documented. Slides were subsequently evaluated using LM after washout interval. The intraobserver variation of results for impression, digital slide quality, minutes to interpretation, and confidence of interpretation was compared between DM and LM. Results: The intraobserver concordance between LM and DM was 93%, with nine discordant interpretations among 135 evaluations under each review modality, respectively. Although reviewers spent more time under DM mode (5 min/slide) than LM mode (2.5 min/slide), the reviewers felt the DM provided sufficient image quality and the confidence levels of reviewers on slide interpretation were comparable between DM (2.6/3) and LM (2.8/3). Conclusion: There was a high level of intraobserver concordance and comparable interpretation confidence between DM and LM. DM can be a useful methodology for off-site pathologist's review of PBS.

AB - Introduction: Peripheral blood smear (PBS) review is a routine laboratory test which requires pathologist's interpretation when abnormal indices, atypical cells, or critical findings are identified. Real-time remote digital microscopy (DM) can potentially facilitate rapid review when an on-site pathologist is not available. Herein, we assess intraobserver concordance of PBS evaluation with light microscopy (LM) and DM using VisionTek M6 robotic DM and TeamViewer imaging software. Methods: Thirty-seven de-identified PBS slides were evaluated by five reviewers. Slides were loaded on a VisionTek M6 robotic microscope at an off-site laboratory and evaluated remotely via TeamViewer software. Reviewers recorded interpretation, time required for interpretation (in minutes), imaging quality (score 0-3), and confidence of interpretation (score 0-3). Other relevant information associated with DM evaluation was also documented. Slides were subsequently evaluated using LM after washout interval. The intraobserver variation of results for impression, digital slide quality, minutes to interpretation, and confidence of interpretation was compared between DM and LM. Results: The intraobserver concordance between LM and DM was 93%, with nine discordant interpretations among 135 evaluations under each review modality, respectively. Although reviewers spent more time under DM mode (5 min/slide) than LM mode (2.5 min/slide), the reviewers felt the DM provided sufficient image quality and the confidence levels of reviewers on slide interpretation were comparable between DM (2.6/3) and LM (2.8/3). Conclusion: There was a high level of intraobserver concordance and comparable interpretation confidence between DM and LM. DM can be a useful methodology for off-site pathologist's review of PBS.

KW - concordance

KW - digital microscopy

KW - peripheral blood smear

KW - telepathology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052628796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052628796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ijlh.12914

DO - 10.1111/ijlh.12914

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 740

EP - 746

JO - International Journal of Laboratory Hematology

JF - International Journal of Laboratory Hematology

SN - 1751-5521

IS - 6

ER -