Lale Leman Edis, Ekin Bora Başaran, Banu Erkal and Aydın Sav*

School of Medicine, Department of Medical Pathology, Yeditepe University Faculty of Medicine, Turkey

*Corresponding Author: Aydın Sav, School of Medicine, Department of Medical Pathology, Yeditepe University Faculty of Medicine, Turkey.

Received: February 17, 2024; Published: April 19, 2024

Abstract

The relationship of technology and pathology, represented by the rise of telepathology in the late 1960s, has evolved into the era of artificial intelligence assisted digital pathology. This field includes the application of digitized specimens to visualize, share, and conclude pathology information in a digital space. Radiomics, the extraction of quantitative features from radiological images, has been an effective technique in neuropathology and intraoperative diagnosis. Ongoing technological advancements, these methods offer enhanced diagnostic accuracy and expedited treatment decisions. However, evaluating their accuracies and reproducibility relative to traditional methods remains controversial. By large, a group of specific techniques used for diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction of intracranial lesions. Digital pathology enables pathologists to assess radiologic images concurrently with frozen section slides, promoting real-time collaboration and informed decision-making regardless of geographical barriers. Our study investigates the reproducibility of digital pathology, AI, and radiomics in neuropathology and intraoperative diagnosis. By analyzing case studies, literature, and data analysis, this research sheds light on factors impacting the reliability of these techniques. Ultimately, this study aims to emphasize potential benefits and limitations of these technologies, mentioning their aspects to clinical practice.

 Keywords: Artificial Intelligence; Digital Pathology; Intraoperative Diagnosis; Neuropathology; Radiomics

References

1. Niazi Muhammad Khalid Khan., et al. “Digital pathology and artificial intelligence”. The Lancet Oncology 5 (2019): e253-e261.
2. Bera Kaustav., et al. “Artificial intelligence in digital pathology - new tools for diagnosis and precision oncology”. Nature reviews. Clinical Oncology11 (2019): 703-715.
3. Baxi Vipul., et al. “Digital pathology and artificial intelligence in translational medicine and clinical practice”. Modern Pathology : An Official Journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc1 (2022): 23-32.
4. Lee Han S and Tarik Tihan. “The basics of intraoperative diagnosis in neuropathology”. Surgical Pathology Clinics 1 (2015): 27-47.
5. Yachnis Anthony T. “Intraoperative consultation for nervous system lesions”. Seminars in Diagnostic Pathology 4 (2002): 192-206.
6. Chang Hye Yoon., et al. “Artificial Intelligence in Pathology”. Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine 1 (2019): 1-12.
7. Kurc Tahsin., et al. “Segmentation and Classification in Digital Pathology for Glioma Research: Challenges and Deep Learning Approaches”. Frontiers in Neuroscience27 (2020).
8. Khonglah Yookarin., et al. “Intraoperative Diagnosis of Central Nervous System Tumors: Challenges, Errors, Lessons Learned, and the Surgeon's Perspective”. Cureus9 (2021): e17823.
9. Fanous Andrew A., et al. “Intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery”. Journal of Neurosurgical Sciences1 (2019): 61-82.
10. Gurcan Metin N., et al. “Histopathological image analysis: a review”. IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering 2 (2009): 147-71.
11. Ghosal Nandita., et al. “Smear preparation of intracranial lesions: a retrospective study of 306 cases”. Diagnostic Cytopathology8 (2011): 582-92.
12. Tanik Canan and Fevziye Kabukcuoglu. “Intraoperative Imprint-squash Methods in Central Nervous System Tumors”. Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni2 (2020): 245-251.
13. Mat Zin Anani Aila and Sarah Zulkarnain. “Diagnostic Accuracy of Cytology Smear and Frozen Section in Glioma”. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP2 321-325.
14. Dey Pranab. “Basic and Advanced Laboratory Techniques in Histopathology and Cytology”. Second edition. Springer, (2022).
15. Singh Gagandeep., et al. “Radiomics and radiogenomics in gliomas: a contemporary update”. British Journal of Cancer5 (2021): 641-657.
16. Yip Stephen S F and Hugo J W L Aerts. “Applications and limitations of radiomics”. Physics in Medicine and Biology13 (2016): R150-166.
17. Kelahan LC., et al. “PathBot: A Radiology-Pathology Correlation Dashboard”. Journal of Digital Imaging6 (2017): 681-686.
18. Modi Mitul., et al. “Importance of intraoperative consultation for the diagnosis of central nervous system lesions and evaluation of its diagnostic accuracy”. Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics6 (2018): 1176-1179.
19. Kurdi Maher., et al. “Diagnostic Discrepancies Between Intraoperative Frozen Section and Permanent Histopathological Diagnosis of Brain Tumors”. “Diagnostic Discrepancies Between Intraoperative Frozen Section and Permanent Histopathological Diagnosis of Brain Tumors”. Turk Patoloji Dergisi1 (2022): 34-39.
20. Al-Ajmi Radiya., et al. “Correlation of Intraoperative Frozen Section Report and Histopathological Diagnosis of Central Nervous System Tumors - A Six-Year Retrospective Study”. Oman Medical Journal6 (2016): 414-420.

Citation

Citation: Aydın Sav., et al. “The Reproducibility of the Use of Digital Pathology and Radiomics in Intraoperative Diagnosis in Neuropathology: The Experience of a Single Center”. Acta Scientific Neurology 7.5 (2024): 04-11.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2024 Aydın Sav., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.