AimThe digital transformation of the pathology laboratory is being continuously sustained by the introduction of innovative technologies promoting whole slide image (WSI)-based primary diagnosis. Here, we proposed a real-life benchmark of a pathology-dedicated medical monitor for the primary diagnosis of renal biopsies, evaluating the concordance between the ‘traditional’ microscope and commercial monitors using WSI from different scanners.MethodsThe College of American Pathologists WSI validation guidelines were used on 60 consecutive renal biopsies from three scanners (Aperio, 3DHISTECH and Hamamatsu) using pathology-dedicated medical grade (MG), professional grade (PG) and consumer-off-the-shelf (COTS) monitors, comparing results with the microscope diagnosis after a 2-week washout period.ResultsMG monitor was faster (1090 vs 1159 vs 1181 min, delta of 6–8%, p<0.01), with slightly better performances on the detection of concurrent diseases compared with COTS (κ=1 vs 0.96, 95% CI=0.87 to 1), but equal concordance to the commercial monitors on main diagnosis (κ=1). Minor discrepancies were noted on specific scores/classifications, with MG and PG monitors closer to the reference report (r=0.98, 95% CI=0.83 to 1 vs 0.98, 95% CI=0.83 to 1 vs 0.91, 95% CI=0.76 to 1, κ=0.93, 95% CI=077 to 1 vs 0.93, 95% CI=0.77 to 1 vs 0.86, 95% CI=0.64 to 1, κ=1 vs 0.50, 95% CI=0 to 1 vs 0.50, 95% CI=0 to 1, for IgA, antineutrophilic cytoplasmic antibody and lupus nephritis, respectively). Streamlined Pipeline for Amyloid detection through congo red fluorescence Digital Analysis detected amyloidosis on both monitors (4 of 30, 13% cases), allowing detection of minimal interstitial deposits with slight overestimation of the Amyloid Score (average 6 vs 7).ConclusionsThe digital transformation needs careful assessment of the hardware component to support a smart and safe diagnostic process. Choosing the display for WSI is critical in the process and requires adequate planning.