Comparison of Computerized Image Analysis with Traditional Semiquantitative Scoring of Perls’ Prussian Blue Stained Hepatic Iron Deposition

Image analysis is now routinely employed as a tool in toxicologic pathology to help quantitate end points of efficacy and safety. It is regarded as a proficient and a sensitive technique to generate numerical data that can be easily interrogated for statistical evaluation. Traditional semiquantitative pathology scoring on the other hand is sometimes regarded as less accurate due to the limitations of the scoring systems employed and the day-to-day variations often noted between pathologists. We therefore decided to generate an optimized histochemical staining and image analysis protocol to compare the accuracy of semiquantitative scoring with computerized image analysis. In order to achieve this, we describe a standardized protocol for staining and image analysis that eliminates or minimizes as many sources of error as possible. The results of this experiment demonstrate that despite consistent variations in scoring between two independent pathologists, correlation with image analysis data of 0.91 to 0.95 (Spearman’s Rho test) was achieved. These data indicate that either image analysis or traditional semiquantitative scoring can generate accurate data. As a result of this, it appears that it is equally safe to employ either method dependent upon the complexity and the practicality of the task at hand provided that the experimental conditions are rigorously optimized and rigidly adhered to.

[1]  M Masseroli,et al.  Automatic quantification of liver fibrosis: design and validation of a new image analysis method: comparison with semi-quantitative indexes of fibrosis. , 2000, Journal of hepatology.

[2]  Y. Deugnier,et al.  Pathology of Hepatic Iron Overload , 2011, Seminars in liver disease.

[3]  Michel Bourel,et al.  Assessment of liver iron content in 271 patients: A reevaluation of direct and indirect methods , 1981 .

[4]  T. S. St. Pierre,et al.  Effects of prolonged iron loading in the rat using both parenteral and dietary routes. , 1999, Biometals.

[5]  N. Bell,et al.  Haemosiderin deposition in Donkey (Equus asinus) livers: Comparison of quantitative histochemistry for iron and liver iron content. , 2011, Research in veterinary science.

[6]  H. Thomas,et al.  Quantitative versus morphological assessment of liver fibrosis: semi‐quantitative scores are more robust than digital image fibrosis area estimation , 2003, Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver.

[7]  C. Taxonera,et al.  A computer-assisted morphometric quantitative analysis of iron overload in liver biopsies. A comparison with histological and biochemical methods. , 2005, Pathology, research and practice.

[8]  A. Ruifrok,et al.  Quantification of histochemical staining by color deconvolution. , 2001, Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology.

[9]  B. Bacon,et al.  Histological evaluation of iron in liver biopsies: relationship to HFE mutations , 2000, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[10]  J. Olynyk,et al.  Computerized measurement of iron in liver biopsies: A comparison with biochemical iron measurement , 1990, Hepatology.

[11]  A. R. Muir,et al.  Hepatic pathology in relatives of patients with haemochromatosis. , 1962, The Journal of pathology and bacteriology.

[12]  S. Nestor Techniques in Neuropathology , 2008 .

[13]  D. Harrison-Findik Gender-related variations in iron metabolism and liver diseases. , 2010, World journal of hepatology.

[14]  R. Colvin,et al.  Renal interstitial fibrosis: mechanisms and evaluation , 2012, Current opinion in nephrology and hypertension.