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