Introduction
Telecytology (TC) has been used in rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) of touch preparations (TPs) from core biopsies and smears from fine-needle aspiration (FNA) procedures. Although TC was established at our institution in 2010, utilization has fluctuated. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the value of TC for maintaining high-quality patient care with the advantages of minimizing contact with hospital personnel and patients, conserving personal protective equipment (PPE), and saving cytopathologists' time. However, the accuracy of TC compared to on site evaluation by cytopathologists has been a concern. This study aimed to address this question.
Material and Methods
697 ROSEs were identified from our quality assurance (QA) data base in 2021 (Q2-Q4) including 1) TC; 2) onsite cytopathologist (OC); and 3) onsite cytotechnologist-only (OCT). Discrepancy rates between ROSE and final diagnoses were compared between TC and OC groups. A student T-test was performed to determine the statistical significance of the discrepancy rate between TC and OC.
Results
Results are summarized in Table 1. On average, there were 26% FNA and 74% Cores by TP. The difference in discrepancy rates between TC and OC during the 3 quarters in 2021 is not statistically significant (p=0.5012). The type of discrepancy for TC was all minor while 17% major and 83% minor for OC.
Conclusion
value of TC for ROSE was highlighted during the pandemic, allowing cytopathologists to participate in ROSE while minimizing interpersonal contact at procedures, conserving PPE, and saving cytopathologists' time. TC provides as high quality as OC for ROSE service with statistically insignificant minor discrepancies with the final diagnosis. Although pandemic-related restrictions are easing, we anticipate that TC will continue to play a major role in ROSE.
PST118