Diagnostic concordance in forensic pathology between Digital Pathology Systems and optical microscopy

Nghiem Chi Cuong, Luu Sy Hung

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study evaluated the diagnostic agreement between a Digital Pathology System (DPS) and conventional optical microscopy in forensic pathology. A total of 1,220 slides from 90 forensic cases were digitized and reviewed using both methods by a forensic pathologist, with a washout period between readings. Agreement was analyzed using Cohen’s Kappa coefficient under two scenarios: complete agreement and complete agreement plus minor discrepancies. High concordance was observed, with agreement rates of 93.03% (κ = 0.909) and 96.80% (κ = 0.957). Major organs such as the brain, heart, liver, and kidney showed agreement rates above 95% (κ = 0.949 – 1.000), while slightly lower agreement was found in lung and spleen due to histological complexity and postmortem changes. These findings suggest that DPS is a reliable alternative to conventional microscopy in forensic histopathology, though further validation is recommended for specific tissues.

Article Details

References

1. Nguyen Duc Nhu, Luu Sy Hung. Khao sat thuc trang nguon nhan luc, co so vat chat, trang thiet bi xet nghiem mo benh hoc tai cac trung phap y cap tinh o Viet Nam. 2021. https://nifm.org.vn/bai-viet/khao-sat-thuc-trang-nguon-nhan-luc-co-so-vat-chat-trang-thiet-bi-xet-nghiem-mo-benh-hoc-tai-cac-trung-tam-phap-y-cap-tinh-o-viet-nam_16722.aspx
2. Evans AJ, Brown RW, Bui MM, et al. Validating Whole Slide Imaging Systems for Diagnostic Purposes in Pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. Apr 1 2022;146(4):440-450. doi:10.5858/arpa.2020-0723-CP
3. Pathology TJSo. Guide to pathological diagnosis using digital pathological images (Second edition). 2024. https://www.pathology.or.jp/tebiki_v2.pdf
4. Pathology TJSo. Digital Pathology System Technical Standards for Pathological Diagnosis, 4th Edition. 2024. https://www.pathology.or.jp/kijun_v4.pdf
5. Chong Y, Kim DC, Jung CK, et al. Recommendations for pathologic practice using digital pathology: consensus report of the Korean Society of Pathologists. J Pathol Transl Med. Nov 2020;54(6):437-452. doi:10.4132/jptm.2020.08.27
6. Goacher E, Randell R, Williams B, et al. The Diagnostic Concordance of Whole Slide Imaging and Light Microscopy: A Systematic Review. Arch Pathol Lab Med. Jan 2017;141(1):151-161. doi:10.5858/arpa.2016-0025-RA
7. Bauer TW, Schoenfield L, Slaw RJ, et al. Validation of whole slide imaging for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. Apr 2013;137(4):518-24. doi:10.5858/arpa.2011-0678-OA
8. Hanna MG, Reuter VE, Hameed MR, et al. Whole slide imaging equivalency and efficiency study: experience at a large academic center. Mod Pathol. Jul 2019;32(7):916-928. doi:10.1038/s41379-019-0205-0
9. Krishnamurthy S, Mathews K, McClure S, et al. Multi-institutional comparison of whole slide digital imaging and optical microscopy for interpretation of hematoxylin-eosin-stained breast tissue sections. Arch Pathol Lab Med. Dec 2013;137(12):1733-9. doi:10.5858/arpa.2012-0437-OA
10. Wilbur DC, Madi K, Colvin RB, et al. Whole-slide imaging digital pathology as a platform for teleconsultation: a pilot study using paired subspecialist correlations. Arch Pathol Lab Med. Dec 2009;133(12):1949-53. doi:10.5858/133.12.1949
11. Thrall MJ, Rivera AL, Takei H, et al. Validation of a novel robotic telepathology platform for neuropathology intraoperative touch preparations. J Pathol Inform. 2014;5(1):21. doi:10.4103/2153-3539.137642