Early insights from the Digital Pathology 2026 Report from KLAS highlight a significant trend: organizations are hitting an adoption wall that has little to do with software performance. While momentum is building, adoption in the US remains limited, with estimates suggesting that only 10 to 15 percent of organizations have implemented digital pathology at any meaningful scale. As technology moves toward the clinical mainstream, the limiting factors are increasingly the human interface and system complexity.
For the lab manager, this represents a shift from technical procurement to operational change management. The majority of institutions remain in pilot phases or partial adoption, underscoring both the opportunity and the complexity associated with scaling digital workflows. According to Eder Lagemann, vice president of engagement at KLAS Research and co-author of the report, a strategic commitment to the right vendor has become a necessity for success.
Solving the friction of digital pathology workflow automation
Distinctions have emerged between pathology-specific vendors and enterprise imaging platforms. Pathology-focused companies are consistently viewed as more responsive to customer needs, particularly in areas such as feature development, workflow optimization, and customization. In contrast, while traditional imaging vendors continue growing quickly through established radiology relationships, some customers report that engagement feels limited once a system is live.
Hardware selection also remains a critical component of adoption. According to KLAS findings, image quality and scanning speed are the primary criteria driving purchasing decisions, though reliability and service responsiveness play important roles in long-term viability. Leica scanners demonstrated the highest level of adoption among surveyed organizations, receiving consistently strong feedback on performance and support. However, costs remain highly influential, as the financial burden extends beyond initial capital expenditures for scanners to include ongoing costs for storage and infrastructure.
Managing the risk of strategic misalignment in lab operations
To scale digital pathology successfully, a lab manager must address the risk of strategic misalignment before it impacts diagnostic turnaround times. A critical success factor identified by early adopters is workflow integration; specifically, AI tools must be "seamlessly embedded" within the diagnostic workflow to deliver meaningful efficiency gains. Current use cases are concentrated in narrow domains, such as breast and prostate pathology, where algorithm development is most advanced.
Storage is a frequently underestimated challenge for lab operations. Digital pathology images are significantly larger than those generated in radiology, requiring substantial capacity and thoughtful data management strategies. To overcome these financial barriers, early adopters are building business cases around workforce strategy. Digital workflows are increasingly attractive to younger pathologists, and the ability to support remote work expands access to talent in a constrained labor market.
Advanced Lab Management Certificate
The Advanced Lab Management certificate is more than training—it’s a professional advantage.
Gain critical skills and IACET-approved CEUs that make a measurable difference.
Addressing the adoption pain point for lab leadership
The decision to transition to digital pathology ultimately hinges on whether the technology solves more problems than it creates. For many lab managers, the primary pain point is the "integration gap"—the moment where a high-cost software purchase fails to gain traction because it disrupts the established speed of the bench. The KLAS data indicate that success lies not in selecting the most advanced algorithm, but in selecting the vendor that best aligns with the existing laboratory information system.
By prioritizing workflow integration over isolated feature sets, lab managers can alleviate the friction that often leads to change fatigue. This requires an audit of current pathology workflows to identify manual bottlenecks that digital tools can specifically address, alongside a review of the user experience provided by existing imaging software to identify points of friction for staff. Establishing a cross-functional team, including pathologists, IT specialists, and the lab manager, is essential for overseeing this integration and ensuring reliability.
Interested in life sciences?
The choice to invest in digital pathology should be viewed as much as a workforce decision as a clinical one. When tools are embedded seamlessly, they act as a force multiplier for a shrinking talent pool; when they are disconnected, they become an expensive hurdle. Navigating this wall requires a commitment to usability that mirrors the lab's commitment to diagnostic accuracy. For a lab manager facing a constrained labor market, the ability of these digital interfaces to support remote work and attract younger professionals serves as a critical strategic advantage.
This article was created with the assistance of Generative AI and has undergone editorial review before publishing.
