Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28966832›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2017

Robotic Telecytology for Remote Cytologic Evaluation without an On-site Cytotechnologist or Cytopathologist: A Tale of Implementation and Review of Constraints.

Sahussapont Joseph Sirintrapun, Dorota Rudomina, Allix Mazzella, Rusmir Feratovic, William Alago, Robert Siegelbaum, Oscar Lin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Integrating digital pathology into clinical practice.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Validation of a digital pathology system including remote review during the COVID-19 pandemic.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Telecytology for Rapid On-Site Evaluation: Current Status.Journal of the American Society of Cytopathology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sahussapont Joseph SirintrapunDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Dorota RudominaDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Allix MazzellaDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Rusmir FeratovicDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
William AlagoDepartment of Radiology, Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Robert SiegelbaumDepartment of Radiology, Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Oscar LinDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe first satellite center to offer interventional radiology procedures at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center opened in October 2014. Two of the procedures offered, fine needle aspirations and core biopsies, required rapid on-site cytologic evaluation of smears and biopsy touch imprints for cellular content and adequacy. The volume and frequency of such evaluations did not justify hiring on-site cytotechnologists, and therefore, a dynamic robotic telecytology (TC) solution was created. In this technical article, we present a detailed description of our implementation of robotic TC.

methodsPathology devised the remote robotic TC solution after acknowledging that it would not be cost effective to staff cytotechnologists on-site at the satellite location. Sakura VisionTek was selected as our robotic TC solution. In addition to configuration of the dynamic robotic TC solution, pathology realized integrating the technology solution into operations would require a multidisciplinary effort and reevaluation of existing staffing and workflows.

resultsExtensively described are the architectural framework and multidisciplinary process re-design, created to navigate the constraints of our technical, cultural, and organizational environment. Also reviewed are the benefits and challenges associated with available desktop sharing solutions, particularly accounting for information security concerns.

conclusionsDynamic robotic TC is effective for immediate evaluations performed without on-site cytotechnology staff. Our goal is providing an extensive perspective of the implementation process, particularly technical, cultural, and operational constraints. Through this perspective, our template can serve as an extensible blueprint for other centers interested in implementing robotic TC without on-site cytotechnologists.

Indexed as

roboticTechnicaltelecytologytelepathologyworkflow

Identifiers

PMID28966832
PMCPMC5609359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.