Next Article in Journal
Association of Hepatic Steatosis Index with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Diagnosed by Non-Enhanced CT in a Screening Population
Previous Article in Journal
Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Role of the Radiologist and Oncologist in the Era of Precision Medicine
Previous Article in Special Issue
Digital Pathology Workflow Implementation at IPATIMUP
Guidelines

Best Practice Recommendations for the Implementation of a Digital Pathology Workflow in the Anatomic Pathology Laboratory by the European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP)

1
European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP), Rua da Constituição n°668, 1° Esq/Traseiras, 4200-194 Porto, Portugal
2
Pathology Unit, “Gravina” Hospital, Caltagirone, ASP Catania, Via Portosalvo 1, 95041 Caltagirone, Italy
3
Department of Medicine and Surgery, Pathology, ASST Monza, San Gerardo Hospital, University of Milano-Bicocca, 20900 Monza, Italy
4
Imginit SAS, 152 Boulevard du Montparnasse, 75014 Paris, France
5
Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Pathology, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany
6
Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Lies Vei 65, 5021 Bergen, Norway
7
Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Jonas Lies Vei 87, 5021 Bergen, Norway
8
Department of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, 200349 Craiova, Romania
9
Sorbonne Université, Institut du Cerveau—Paris Brain Institute—ICM, Inserm, CNRS, APHP, Inria Team “Aramis”, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière, 75013 Paris, France
10
Department of Mathematics, Computer Science and Physics, University of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy
11
Ipatimup Diagnostics, Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology of Porto University (Ipatimup), 4200-804 Porto, Portugal
12
Medical Faculty, University of Porto, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Consolato M. Sergi
Diagnostics 2021, 11(11), 2167; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11112167 (registering DOI)
Received: 25 October 2021 / Revised: 15 November 2021 / Accepted: 19 November 2021 / Published: 22 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Digital Pathology: Records of Successful Implementations)
The interest in implementing digital pathology (DP) workflows to obtain whole slide image (WSI) files for diagnostic purposes has increased in the last few years. The increasing performance of technical components and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of systems for primary diagnosis led to increased interest in applying DP workflows. However, despite this revolutionary transition, real world data suggest that a fully digital approach to the histological workflow has been implemented in only a minority of pathology laboratories. The objective of this study is to facilitate the implementation of DP workflows in pathology laboratories, helping those involved in this process of transformation to identify: (a) the scope and the boundaries of the DP transformation; (b) how to introduce automation to reduce errors; (c) how to introduce appropriate quality control to guarantee the safety of the process and (d) the hardware and software needed to implement DP systems inside the pathology laboratory. The European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP) provided consensus-based recommendations developed through discussion among members of the Scientific Committee. The recommendations are thus based on the expertise of the panel members and on the agreement obtained after virtual meetings. Prior to publication, the recommendations were reviewed by members of the ESDIP Board. The recommendations comprehensively cover every step of the implementation of the digital workflow in the anatomic pathology department, emphasizing the importance of interoperability, automation and tracking of the entire process before the introduction of a scanning facility. Compared to the available national and international guidelines, the present document represents a practical, handy reference for the correct implementation of the digital workflow in Europe. View Full-Text
Keywords: digital pathology; anatomic pathology workflow; whole slide imaging; laboratory information system digital pathology; anatomic pathology workflow; whole slide imaging; laboratory information system
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Fraggetta, F.; L’Imperio, V.; Ameisen, D.; Carvalho, R.; Leh, S.; Kiehl, T.-R.; Serbanescu, M.; Racoceanu, D.; Della Mea, V.; Polonia, A.; Zerbe, N.; Eloy, C. Best Practice Recommendations for the Implementation of a Digital Pathology Workflow in the Anatomic Pathology Laboratory by the European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP). Diagnostics 2021, 11, 2167. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11112167

AMA Style

Fraggetta F, L’Imperio V, Ameisen D, Carvalho R, Leh S, Kiehl T-R, Serbanescu M, Racoceanu D, Della Mea V, Polonia A, Zerbe N, Eloy C. Best Practice Recommendations for the Implementation of a Digital Pathology Workflow in the Anatomic Pathology Laboratory by the European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP). Diagnostics. 2021; 11(11):2167. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11112167

Chicago/Turabian Style

Fraggetta, Filippo, Vincenzo L’Imperio, David Ameisen, Rita Carvalho, Sabine Leh, Tim-Rasmus Kiehl, Mircea Serbanescu, Daniel Racoceanu, Vincenzo Della Mea, Antonio Polonia, Norman Zerbe, and Catarina Eloy. 2021. "Best Practice Recommendations for the Implementation of a Digital Pathology Workflow in the Anatomic Pathology Laboratory by the European Society of Digital and Integrative Pathology (ESDIP)" Diagnostics 11, no. 11: 2167. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11112167

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop