Related Experiment Videos
Application of scanning electron microscopy to diagnostic pathology. A critical review
Abstract:
A survey with critical comment of the present state of SEM knowledge is given for those internal organs that are most important for the surgical and anatomical pathologist. With the exception of microanalysis, today SEM does not aid diagnosis by the pathologist because the SEM results are, at present, not certain enough to justify their application to a diagnosis with clinical consequences where the same results can be obtained by the accustomed LM and TEM with their respective adjuvant techniques like histochemistry or immune histology. In the future, SEM will only be established as an essential diagnostic tool when SEM reveals hitherto unknown morphological patterns which can be related to clinical syndromes; some suggestions are made where this can be achieved.
Insights
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) currently offers limited diagnostic value for pathologists due to uncertain results. Future applications depend on SEM identifying novel morphological patterns linked to clinical syndromes.
Area of Science:
- Pathology
- Electron Microscopy
- Surgical Pathology
Background:
- Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) is a technique used in pathology.
- Its application in diagnosing internal organs is under review.
- Current limitations hinder its diagnostic utility.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically evaluate the current state of SEM knowledge for pathologists.
- To assess the diagnostic potential of SEM in surgical and anatomical pathology.
- To identify future directions for SEM in clinical diagnostics.
Main Methods:
- A survey of existing SEM knowledge and applications.
- Critical commentary on the reliability and certainty of SEM results.
- Comparison of SEM with traditional Light Microscopy (LM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) techniques.
Main Results:
- SEM, excluding microanalysis, does not currently aid pathological diagnosis.
- SEM results lack the certainty required for clinical decisions compared to LM and TEM.
- Established techniques like histochemistry and immune histology offer comparable or superior diagnostic information.
Conclusions:
- SEM is not yet an essential diagnostic tool for pathologists.
- Future integration requires SEM to reveal novel, clinically relevant morphological patterns.
- Suggestions are provided for achieving this in future research.