TABLE 3.

Summary of the Advantages and Disadvantages between the WMP and SPR-based Pathology to Imaging Correlation Methods

Imaging to Pathology Correlation Approach	Advantages	Disadvantages
Whole mount processing (WMP)	Allows for improved precision and accuracy in imaging to pathology correlation Mapping of nonfocal lesions may be possible Pixel-level correlation and analysis may be possible Enables volumetric assessment of lesion volume in histopathology	Modifications to the routine clinical workflow may be required (tissue processing protocols, ex vivo imaging, patient-specific mold processing) Increased processing complexity and time (in our case, final pathology report could be delayed by up to 2 weeks when WMP processing was applied), without demonstrated immediate clinical benefit to the patient Deformable registration is required to enable detailed mapping to imaging; no robust, cross-site validated, and widely available tools for such registration exist Validation of registration between WMP and imaging is challenging Cannot be used reliably for mapping all lesions in the gland Reporting errors (eg, due to incorrect recording of the lesion location) are challenging to identify or correct retrospectively Volumetric assessment of the lesion from histopathology is not possible
Surgical pathology report (SPR)	Ubiquitously available, provided by routine clinical workflows May be sufficient for focal lesion localization in most cases

SPR, surgical pathology report; WMP, whole mount pathology.