The feasibility of low‐cost portable microscopes as an alternative to standard microscopes for rapid on‐site evaluation of FNA
Mishaal Gardezi, Mahtab Fakhari, Diane M. Libert, Ronit Dey, Theodore Phan, Traci Shiu, Adebola M. Adeniyi, Cheyenne Martin, Breeana Snowball, Alarice Cheng-Yi Lowe · Cancer Cytopathology · 2025
BACKGROUND: The high cost of professional-quality microscopes for pathology labs can create a barrier to the availability of diagnostic services, especially in resource-constrained settings. Low-cost portable microscopes (LCPMs) are popular for recreational use and widely available. To our knowledge, they have not been evaluated for use in rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). The aim of this study was to identify which LCPMs have the potential for clinical use. METHODS: In this investigation, five LCPMs were evaluated by 18 pathology professionals to determine the adequacy of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy readings using patient-generated material. Participants were surveyed to systematically assess preferred and undesirable characteristics of LCPMs and to provide feedback on their use. RESULTS: Most expressed that though LCPMs were not a comparable replacement for standard microscopes, they were a better option than nothing and could be helpful in instances with highly cellular and relatively flat slide preparations. Most participants believed that LCPMs could be used for ROSE in resource-limited environments. CONCLUSIONS: Pathology professional evaluated LCPMs on simulated fine-needle aspiration biopsy smear slides. The feedback they provided in this study suggests that LCPMs may be a feasible alternative to standard microscopes for ROSE in resource-limited settings.