Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42647385›Full record

ReviewDermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Emerging In Vivo and Ex Vivo Optical Imaging Technologies in Dermatology and Dermatopathology.

Christoph Müller, Harald Kittler, Mathias Drach

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Christoph MüllerDepartment of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-5031-7255
Harald KittlerDepartment of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0051-8016
Mathias DrachDepartment of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optical imaging technologies are increasingly reshaping the interface between clinical dermatology and dermatopathology. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (IV-RCM), line-field confocal optical coherence tomography (LC-OCT), and ex vivo confocal microscopy (EV-CM) provide tissue-level morphological information without the need for conventional histopathologic processing or with substantially reduced processing times. These technologies have enabled the concept of the "virtual biopsy" and are increasingly integrated into diagnostic workflows. However, their clinical value cannot be understood solely through conventional diagnostic performance metrics such as sensitivity and specificity. Rather, their impact depends on how the information they generate is incorporated into sequential diagnostic pathways and clinical decision-making processes. This review summarizes the principles, current applications, diagnostic performance, limitations, and future prospects of IV-RCM, LC-OCT, and EV-CM. We discuss the complementary strengths of these modalities and propose a systems perspective in which imaging technologies are viewed as components of diagnostic ecosystems linking clinical examination, dermatoscopy, pathology, surgery, and computational decision support. Emerging developments in artificial intelligence, multimodal imaging, and digital pathology are likely to further strengthen these connections and expand the role of optical imaging in dermatology and dermatopathology.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencedermatopathologydigital pathologyex vivo confocal microscopyline-field confocal optical coherence tomography (LC-OCT)non-invasive skin imagingreflectance confocal microscopy (RCM)skin cancer diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID42647385
PMCPMC13510460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.