Critical Comparison of Digital Pathology Systems
May 1, 2007
Digital pathology is slowly gaining acceptance in both the clinical and research markets,
and this is due in part to the wide spectrum of whole-slide scanning systems in the market
today. However, whole slide scanning on its own is not sufficient. In order for digital
pathology to be fully embraced by both clinical and research pathologists, image
acquisition must be bundled with comprehensive image analysis applications and image
management systems to provide a total digital pathology solution.
Whole-slide image acquisition is only partially useful on its own. Without reliable, stable,
flexible, secured, and compliant image management of these whole-slide images,
archiving and sharing becomes a serious problem. In addition, without being able to store
metadata with the images and search for whole-slide images, pathologists can not fully
benefit from them. Furthermore, image analysis on these whole-slide images can
significantly reduce the time spent analyzing/screening these images and can also
significantly improve patient care.1 Therefore, a total digital pathology solution,
incorporating image analysis and image management will drive the pathology industry
digital.
In this **, I critically evaluate 9 digital pathology systems and compare their image
acquisition, image analysis, and image management capabilities against each other. In
addition, I also provide a basic cost analysis. I evaluate the number of supported
algorithms, progress with FDA clearance, supported image formats, ability to support
remote viewing and sharing of images, and their supported magnifications of image
acquisition, along with several other features. I also evaluate each solution in terms of its
completeness as a digital pathology solution.
A complete digital pathology solution can significantly improve patient care and shorten
research and development cycles. It can also simplify the sharing of data between
collaborators and facilitate virtual second opinions. As a result, a total digital pathology
solution can improve the current practice of pathology.
Yukako Yagi, Ph.D.
Adjunct Professor, Department of Pathology
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland OH 44106
Adjunct Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine
Tokai University, School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
Adjunct Professor, Department of Pathology
Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
412-401-3386
yagiy@comcast.net
1
“ASCO/CAP Guideline Recommendations for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in
Breast Cancer”, Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine - January 2007
