RESUMEN
Renal cell carcinoma is a significant health burden worldwide, necessitating accurate and efficient diagnostic methods to guide treatment decisions. Traditional pathology practices have limitations, including interobserver variability and time-consuming evaluations. In recent years, digital pathology tools emerged as a promising solution to enhance the diagnosis and management of renal cancer. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state and potential of digital pathology in the context of renal cell carcinoma. Through advanced image analysis algorithms, artificial intelligence (AI) technologies facilitate quantification of cellular and molecular markers, leading to improved accuracy and reproducibility in renal cancer diagnosis. Digital pathology platforms empower remote collaboration between pathologists and help with the creation of comprehensive databases for further research and machine learning applications. The integration of digital pathology tools with other diagnostic modalities, such as radiology and genomics, enables a novel multimodal characterization of different types of renal cell carcinoma. With continuous advancements and refinement, AI technologies are expected to play an integral role in diagnostics and clinical decision-making, improving patient outcomes. In this article, we explored the digital pathology instruments available for clear cell, papillary and chromophobe renal cancers from pathologist and data analyst perspectives.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: This study aims to describe and assess the current stage of the artificial intelligence (AI) technology integration in preventive orthopaedics of the knee and hip joints. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted in strict compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Literature databases were searched for articles describing the development and validation of AI models aimed at diagnosing knee or hip joint pathologies or predicting their development or course in patients. The quality of the included articles was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and QUADAS-AI tools. RESULTS: 56 articles were found that meet all the inclusion criteria. We identified two problems that block the full integration of AI into the routine of an orthopaedic physician. The first of them is related to the insufficient amount, variety and quality of data for training, and validation and testing of AI models. The second problem is the rarity of rational evaluation of models, which is why their real quality cannot always be evaluated. CONCLUSION: The vastness and relevance of the studied topic are beyond doubt. Qualitative and optimally validated models exist in all four scopes considered. Additional optimization and confirmation of the models' quality on various datasets are the last technical stumbling blocks for creating usable software and integrating them into the routine of an orthopaedic physician.
