| pubmed-article:16107083 | pubmed:abstractText | To determine whether still digital images of neurosurgical specimens sent by e-mail are an effective and safe way of obtaining an emergency pathological diagnosis, representative images from 48 neurosurgical smear specimens were digitized, compressed and sent by electronic mail to our consultant neuropathologist with relevant clinical and radiological information. The time to select, digitize, compress and send the images for each case was recorded. Comparison was made between diagnosis made from digital images (DI) and historical smear (HS) using the original permanent section (PS) diagnosis as the gold standard. A diagnosis of normal vs. abnormal, neoplastic vs. non-neoplastic, primary vs. secondary and tumor grade was made in each case. The mean time for selection and digitalization of each case was 9.51 minutes. The number of correct pathological diagnosis was 41/48 using DI and 48/48 using HS, giving an accuracy rate of 85.4% and 100% respectively. DI was 100% sensitive in recognizing neoplastic tissue but only 98% specific. Most inaccuracies were in grading and caused by problems with field selection and familiarity with the technique. We conclude that static digital images are reliable and safe method of interpreting tissue during neurosurgical procedures. This corresponds with the findings of previous studies. | lld:pubmed |
