Export file:


  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text


  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Application of Digital Imaging for Cytopathology under Conditions of Georgia

Georgian Telemedicine Union (Association), Kostava str., 0171, Tbilisi, Georgia

Special Issues: WSI, and the observer performance and human factors involved in this application of WSI

Digital imaging in cytopathology can be defined as a series of procedures, those contributing to the quality of the displayed on the computer monitor final image. The procedures include sample preparation and staining, optical image formation by the microscope and afterwards the digital image sampling by the camera sensor; which means digital image post-processing and compression, transmission across the network and display on the monitor. A large amount of data about digital imaging exist. However, there are existing the problems with standardization and understanding of the digital imaging complete process. The field of digital imaging is rapidly evolving. The new models and protocols of the digital imaging are developed around the world, but in Georgia this field is still at evolving stages and revolves around static telecytology. It has been revealed, that the application of easy available and adaptable technology together with the improvement of infrastructure conditions is the essential basis for digital imaging. This tool is very useful for implementation of second opinion consultations on difficult cases. Digital imaging significantly increases knowledge exchange and thereby ensured a better medical service. The article aims description of digital imaging application for cytopathology under conditions of Georgia.
  Article Metrics

Keywords eHealth; digital imaging; telecytology; Internet; medical information system; second opinion consultation; cytopathology

Citation: Ekaterina Kldiashvili, Archil Burduli, Gocha Ghortlishvili. Application of Digital Imaging for Cytopathology under Conditions of Georgia. AIMS Medical Science, 2015, 2(3): 186-199. doi: 10.3934/medsci.2015.3.186


  • 1. Banta D (2003) The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy 63: 121-132.    
  • 2. Chatman C (2010) How cloud computing is changing the face of health care information technology. J Health Care Compliance 12(3): 37-70.
  • 3. Clamp S, Keen J (2007) Electronic health records: Is the evidence base any use? J Med Informatics Int Med 32: 5-10.
  • 4. Coleman R (2009) Can histology and pathology be taught without microscopes? The advantages and disadvantages of virtual histology. J Acta Histochemica 111(1): 1-4.
  • 5. Detmer D (2000) Information technology for quality health care: a summary of United Kingdom and United States experiences. Quality in Health Care 9: 181-189.    
  • 6. Detmer D (2001) Transforming health care in the internet era. World Hospital Health Ser 37: 2.
  • 7. Dixon R, Stahl J (2008) Virtual visits in a general medicine practice: A pilot study. Telemed e-Health 14(6): 525-530.
  • 8. Furness PN (1997) The use of digital images in pathology. J Patholo183: 15-24.
  • 9. Haughton J (2011) Year of the underdog: Cloud-based EHRs. Healthcare Management Technolo 32(1): 9
  • 10. Hayrinen K, Saranto K, Nykanen P (2008) Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: A review of the research literature. Inter J Med Inform 77: 291-304.
  • 11. Horbinski C, Wiley CA (2009) Comparison of telepathology systems in neuropathological intraoperative consultations. J Neuropatholo 19(2): 317-322.
  • 12. Hufnagl P, Schluns K (2008) Virtual microscopy and routine diagnostics. A discussion paper. J Patholo 29(2): 250-254.
  • 13. Kabachinski J (2011) What's the forecast for cloud computing in healthcare? Biomedical Instrumental Technolo 45(2): 146-150.
  • 14. Kayser K, Hoshang SA, Metze K, et al. (2008) Texture- and object-related automated information analysis in histological still images of various organs. J Analytical Quantitative Cytolo Histo 30(6): 323-335.
  • 15. Kobb R, Lane R, Stallings D (2008) E-learning and telehealth: Measuring your success. Telemedicine and e-Health 14(6): 576-579.
  • 16. Lane K (2006) Telemedicine news. Telemedicine and e-Health 12(5): 507-511.
  • 17. Lareng L (2002) Telemedicine in Europe. European J Int Med 13: 1-13.
  • 18. Leong FJ, Graham AK, Schwarzmann P (2000) Clinical trial of telepathology as an alternative modality in breast histopathology quality assurance. J Telemed E-Health 6: 373-377.
  • 19. Mencarelli R, Marcolongo A, Gasparetto A (2008) Organizational model for a telepathology system. J Diagnostic Patholo 15(3): S7.
  • 20. Merell R, Doarn C (2008) Is it time for a telemedicine breakthrough? Telemed e-Health 14(6): 505-506.
  • 21. Moore D, Green J, Jay S, et al. (1994). Creating a new paradigm for CME: Seizing opportunities within the health care revolution. J Continuing Education in the Health Professionals 14: 4-31.    
  • 22. Moura A, Del Giglio A (2000) Education via internet. Revist da Associacao Medica Brasileira, 46(1): 47-51.
  • 23. Nannings B, Abu-Hanna A (2006) Decision support telemedicine systems: A conceptual model and reusable templates. Telemed e-Health 12(6): 644-654.
  • 24. Pak H (2007) Telethinking. Telemed e-Health 13(5): 483-486.
  • 25. Raab SS, Zaleski MS, Thomas PA (1996) Telecytology: diagnostic accuracy in cervical-vaginal smears. American J Clin Patholo 105: 599-603.
  • 26. Riva G (2000) From telehealth to e-health: Internet and distributed virtual reality in health care. J CyberPsychology Behavior 3(6): 989-998.
  • 27. Riva G (2002) The emergence of e-health: using virtual reality and the internet for providing advanced healthcare services. Int J Healthcare Technolo Management 4 (1/2): 15-40.
  • 28. Rocha R, Vassallo J, Soares F, et al. (2009) Digital slides: present status of a tool for consultation, teaching, and quality control in pathology. J Patholo Res Prac 205(11): 735-741.
  • 29. Rosenthal A, Mork P, Li MH, et al. (2010) Cloud computing: a new business paradigm for biomedical information sharing. J Biomed Inform 43(2): 342-353.
  • 30. Sloot P, Tirado-Ramos A, Altintas I, et al. (2006) From molecule to man: Decision support in individualized E-Health. Computer 39(11): 40-46.
  • 31. Van Ginneken AM (2002) The computerized patient record: Balancing effort and benefit. Int J Med Inform 65: 97-119.
  • 32. Weinstein RS, Graham AR, Richte LC, et al. (2009) Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: prospects for the future. J Human Patholo 40(8): 1057-1069.
  • 33. Bautista PA, Yagi Y (2010) Improving the visualization and detection of tissue folds in whole slide images through color enhancement. J Pathol Inform 1:25.
  • 34. Bloom K (2009) The virtual consultative network. Presented at Pathol. Vis. Conf., San Diego.
  • 35. Bruch LA, De Young BR, Kreiter CD, et al. (2009) Competency assessment of residents in surgical pathology using virtual microscopy. Hum Pathol 40: 1122–1128.
  • 36. Chargari C, Comperat E, Magne N, et al. (2011) Prostate needle biopsy examination by means of virtual microscopy. Pathol Res Pract 207: 366-369.
  • 37. Costello SS, Johnston DJ, Dervan PA, et al. (2003) Development and evaluation of the virtual pathology slide: a new tool in telepathology. J Med Int Res 5: e11.
  • 38. Daniel C, Rojo MG, Klossa J, et al. (2011) Standardizing the use of whole slide images in digital pathology. Comput Med Imaging Graph 35: 496-505.
  • 39. Dee FR (2009) Virtual microscopy in pathology education. Hum Pathol 40: 1112-1121.
  • 40. Della Mea V, Bortolotti N, Beltrami CA (2009) eSlide suite: an open source software system for whole slide imaging. J Clin Pathol 62: 749-751.
  • 41. DICOM Stand. Comm. Work. Group 26 Pathol. Specimen Module and Revised Pathology SOP Classes, suppl. 122., 2008. Available from ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/final/sup122_ft2.pdf
  • 42. DICOM Stand. Comm. Work. Group 26 Pathol. Whole Slide Microscopic Image IOD and SOP Classes, suppl. 145, 2008. Available from ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/supps/sup145_ft.pdf.
  • 43. Difranco MD, O'Hurley G, Kay EW, et al. (2011) Ensemble based system for whole-slide prostate cancer probability mapping using color texture features. Comput Med Imaging Graph 35: 629-645.
  • 44. Evans AJ, Chetty R, Clarke BA, et al. (2009) Primary frozen section diagnosis by robotic microscopy and virtual slide telepathology: the University Health Network experience. Hum Pathol 40: 1070-1081.
  • 45. Evans AJ (2011) Re: Barriers and facilitators to adoption of soft copy interpretation from the user perspective: lessons learned from filmless radiology for slideless pathology. J Pathol Inform 2: 8.
  • 46. Evans AJ, Sinard JH, Fatheree LA, et al. (2011) Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: recommendations of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Anal. Cell Pathol 34: 169-203.
  • 47. Evered A, Dudding N (2010) Accuracy and perceptions of virtual microscopy compared with glass slide microscopy in cervical cytology. Cytopatholo 22: 82-87.
  • 48. Fallon MA, Wilbur DC, Prasad M (2010) Ovarian frozen section diagnosis: Use of whole-slide imaging shows excellent correlation between virtual slide and original interpretations in a large series of cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med 134: 1020-1023.
  • 49. Fine JL, Grzybicki DM, Silowash R, et al. (2008) Evaluation of whole slide image immunohistochemistry interpretation in challenging prostate needle biopsies. Hum Pathol 39: 564–572.
  • 50. Fonyad L, Gerely L, Cserneky M, et al. (2010) Shifting gears higher—digital slides in graduate education—4 years experience at Semmelweis University. Diagn Pathol 5: 73.
  • 51. Fung KM, Hassell LA, Talbert ML, et al. (2012) Whole slide images and digital media in pathology education, testing, and practice: the Oklahoma experience. Anal Cell Pathol 35: 37-40.
  • 52. Gabril MY, Yousef GM (2010) Informatics for practicing anatomical pathologists: marking a new era in pathology practice. Mod Pathol 23: 349-358.
  • 53. Gilbertson JR, Ho J, Anthony L, et al. (2006) Primary histologic diagnosis using automated whole slide imaging: a validation study. BMC Clin Pathol 6: 4.
  • 54. Graham AR, Bhattacharyya AK, Scott KM, et al. (2009) Virtual slide telepathology for an academic teaching hospital surgical pathology quality assurance program. Hum Pathol 40: 1129-1136.
  • 55. Hassell LA, Fung KM, Chaser B (2011) Digital slides and ACGME resident competencies in anatomic pathology: an altered paradigm for acquisition and assessment. J Pathol Inform 2: 27.
  • 56. Hede K (2008) Breast cancer testing scandal shines spotlight on black box of clinical laboratory testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 100: 836-844.
  • 57. Hedvat CV (2008) Digital microscopy: past, present, and future. Arch Pathol Lab Med 134: 1666-1670.
  • 58. Ho J, Parwani AV, Jukic DM, et al. (2006) Use of whole slide imaging in surgical pathology quality assurance: design and pilot validation studies. Hum Pathol 37: 322-331.
  • 59. Ho J (2009) Validating digital slides for clinical use: When is image quality good enough? Presented at Pathol Vis Conf, San Diego.
  • 60. Huisman A, Looijen A, van den Brink SM, et al. (2010) Creation of a fully digital pathology slide archive by high-volume tissue slide scanning. Hum Pathol 41: 751-757.
  • 61. Jukic DM, Drogowski LM, Martina J, et al. (2011) Clinical examination and validation of primary diagnosis in anatomic pathology using whole slide digital images. Arch Pathol Lab Med 135: 372-378.
  • 62. Isaacs M, Lennerz JK, Yates S, et al. (2011) Implementation of whole slide imaging in surgical pathology: a value added approach. J Pathol Inform 2: 39.
  • 63. Kalinski T, Zwonitzer R, Sel S, et al. (2008) Virtual3Dmicroscopy usingmultiplane whole slide images in diagnostic pathology. Am J Clin Pathol 130: 259-264.
  • 64. Krupinski EA, Tillack AA, Richter L, et al. (2006) Eye-movement study and human performance using telepathology virtual slides: implications for medical education and differences with experience. Hum Pathol 37: 1543-1556.
  • 65. Krupinski EA (2009) Virtual slide telepathology workstation of the future: lessons learned from teleradiology. Hum Pathol 40: 1100-1111.
  • 66. Li L, Dangott BJ, Parwani AV (2010) Development and use of a genitourinary pathology digital teaching set for trainee education. J Pathol Inform 1: 2.
  • 67. Lopez AM, Graham AR, Barker GP, et al. (2009) Virtual slide telepathology enables an innovative telehealth rapid breast care clinic. Hum Pathol 40: 1082-1091.
  • 68. Manion E, Cohen MB, Weydert J (2008) Mandatory second opinion in surgical pathology referral material: clinical consequences of major disagreements. Am J Surg Pathol 32: 732-737.
  • 69. Massone C, Brunasso AM, Campbell TM, et al. (2008) State of the art of teledermatopathology. Am J Dermatopathol 30: 446-450.
  • 70. Marchevsky AM, Khurana R, Thomas P, et al. (2006) The use of virtual microscopy for proficiency testing in gynecologic cytopathology: a feasibility study using ScanScope. Arch Pathol Lab Med 130: 349-355.
  • 71. McClintock DS, Lee RE, Gilbertson JR (2012) Using computerized workflow simulations to assess the feasibility of whole slide imaging full adoption in a high-volume histology laboratory. Anal Cell Pathol 35: 57-64.    
  • 72. Merk M, Knuechel R, Perez-Bouza A (2010) Web-based virtual microscopy at the RWTH Aachen University: didactic concept, methods and analysis of acceptance by the students. Ann Anat 192: 383-387.
  • 73. Mooney E, Hood AF, Lampros J, et al. (2011) Comparative diagnostic accuracy in virtual dermatopathology. Skin Res Technol 17: 251-255.
  • 74. Nielsen PS, Lindebjerg J, Rasmussen J, et al. (2010). Virtual microscopy: an evaluation of its validity and diagnostic performance in routine histologic diagnosis of skin tumors. Hum Pathol 41: 1770-1776.
  • 75. Pantanowitz L (2010) Digital images and the future of digital pathology. J Pathol Inform 1: 15.
  • 76. Patterson ES, Rayo M, Gill C, et al. (2011) Barriers and facilitators to adoption of soft copy interpretation from the user perspective: lessons learned from filmless radiology for slideless pathology. J Pathol Inform 2: 9.
  • 77. Paulsen FP, Eichhorn M, Brauer L (2010) Virtual microscopy: the future of teaching histology in the medical curriculum? Ann Anat 192: 378-382.
  • 78. Raab SS, Nakhleh RE, Ruby SG (2005) Patient safety in anatomic pathology: measuring discrepancy frequencies and causes. Arch Pathol Lab Med 129: 459-466.
  • 79. Raab SS, Grzybicki DM, Mahood LK, et al. (2008) Effectiveness of random and focused review in detecting surgical pathology error. Am J Clin Pathol 130: 905-912.
  • 80. Ramey JP, Fung K, Hassell LA (2011) Validation of pathologist use of whole slide images for remote frozen section evaluation. Mod Pathol 24: 436 (Abstr.).
  • 81. Ramey JP, Fung K, Hassell LA (2011) Use of mobile high resolution device for remote frozen section evaluation of whole slide images. Mod Pathol 24: 341 (Abstr.).
  • 82. Reyes C, Ikpatt F, Nadiji M, et al. (2011) Is virtual microscopy ready for the prime time? A comparison with conventional microscopy. Mod Pathol 24: 454 (Abstr.).
  • 83. Rodriguez-Urrego PA, Cronin AM, Al-Ahmadie HA, et al. (2011) Interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility in digital and routine microscopic assessment of prostate needle biopsies. Hum Pathol 42: 68-74.
  • 84. Sawai T, Uzuki M, Kamataki A, et al. (2010) The state of telepathology in Japan. J Pathol Inform 1: 13.    
  • 85. Schrader T, Niepage S, Leuthold T, et al. (2006) The diagnostic path, a useful visualisation tool in virtual microscopy. Diagn Pathol 1: 40.
  • 86. Siegel EL, Kolonder RM (1999) Filmless Radiology. New York: Springer.
  • 87. Spinosa JC (2008) Minute by minute, digital a boon to tumor board. Coll Am Pathol Today Arch.: Oct.
  • 88. Stewart J, Miyazaki K, Bevans-Wilkins K, et al. (2007) Virtual microscopy for cytology proficiency testing: Are we there yet? Cancer 111: 203-209.
  • 89. Stratman C (2009) Digital pathology in the clinical histology lab: a time and motion study. Presented at Pathol Vis Conf, San Diego.
  • 90. Thrall M, Pantanowitz L, Khalbuss W (2011) Telecytology: clinical applications, current challenges, and future benefits. J Pathol Inform 2: 51.
  • 91. Thorstenson S (2009) From the conventional microscope to the digital slide scanner in routine diagnostic histopathology. Presented at Pathol. Vis. Conf., San Diego.
  • 92. Tsuchihashi Y, Takamatsu T, Hashimoto Y, et al. (2008) Use of virtual slide system for quick frozen intra-operative telepathology diagnosis in Kyoto, Japan. Diagn Pathol 3(Suppl. 1): 6.
  • 93. van den Tweel JG, Bosman FT (2011) The use of virtual slides in the EUROPALS examination. Diagn Pathol 6(Suppl. 1): 23.
  • 94. Velez N, Jukic D, Ho J (2008) Evaluation of two whole-slide imaging applications in dermatopathology. Hum Pathol 39: 1341-1349.
  • 95. Weinstein RS, Graham AR, Richter LC, et al. (2009) Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: prospects for the future. Hum Pathol 40: 1057-1069.
  • 96. Wilbur DC, Madi K, Colvin RB, et al. (2009) Whole-slide imaging digital pathology as a platform for teleconsultation: a pilot study using paired subspecialist correlations. Arch Pathol Lab Med 133: 1949-1953.
  • 97. Williams S, Henricks WH, Becich MJ, et al. (2010) Telepathology for patient care: What am I getting myself into? Adv Anat Pathol 17: 130-149.
  • 98. Woolgar JA, Ferlito A, Devaney KO, et al. (2011) How trustworthy is a diagnosis in head and neck surgical pathology? A consideration of diagnostic discrepancies (errors). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 268: 643-651.    


Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

Copyright Info: 2015, Ekaterina Kldiashvili, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved