Review spotlights pathology technicians’ role in veterinary labs

CURRENT FULL VERSION: A newly published review is putting a spotlight on a part of veterinary medicine that often stays behind the scenes: pathology technicians. In Animals, researchers argue that these professionals are central to veterinary diagnostics, research, and teaching, even though their contributions are often less visible than those of pathologists or clinicians. The paper arrives as veterinary laboratories face heavier workloads and more technically demanding workflows, from advanced histology and molecular methods to digital pathology and AI-assisted image analysis. That pressure is building within a broader diagnostics market where practices are also being asked to evaluate a growing number of new analyzers, software platforms, and AI-enabled tools, each promising faster answers and better care. (mdpi.com)

The review frames that shift against broader changes in veterinary care. The authors note that demand for advanced diagnostics has grown alongside increased expectations for companion animal medicine, contributing to higher workload in pathology laboratories. Their literature review also found that veterinary-specific publications on pathology technicians remain limited, which helps explain why the profession’s role is still not well defined in the published veterinary literature compared with adjacent laboratory professions. That underdefinition matters because, as one recent industry discussion in Veterinary Practice News noted, veterinary teams are now navigating a “sea of options” in diagnostics, where the challenge is no longer access alone but deciding which technologies genuinely fit a hospital’s medicine, workflow, finances, and long-term goals. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

In practical terms, the paper describes pathology technicians as deeply involved in the steps that determine whether a sample can yield a reliable answer. Those responsibilities include specimen reception and conformity checks, tissue handling, microtomy, staining, quality control, recordkeeping, and biosafety oversight in laboratories, necropsy rooms, and teaching spaces. The authors call technicians the “first line of protection” in biosafety systems because they manage the day-to-day handling, transfer, storage, and containment of potentially zoonotic material. They also argue that technicians help preserve diagnostic validity by protecting traceability and reducing pre-analytic and analytic errors before a pathologist ever reads a slide. In other words, even the most sophisticated diagnostic platform still depends on disciplined technical execution. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

The timing matters because pathology workflows are becoming more digital. A recent Veterinary Pathology review on AI in veterinary diagnostic histopathology found only 34 published studies through September 5, 2025, and reported that real-world adoption in diagnostic labs is still limited, with barriers including generalizability, latency, and cost. Still, one surveyed laboratory had already incorporated two AI models into routine workflows and was evaluating more. A separate 2025 review on digital pathology in veterinary clinical pathology described expanding use of AI-based image analysis in hematology, urinalysis, and related specimen review, while emphasizing that expert oversight remains essential. Taken together, those reports suggest that as labs modernize, technical staff will play an even larger role in standardizing slide preparation, scanning workflows, and quality assurance needed to make digital tools trustworthy. They also echo a practical concern now facing hospitals more broadly: futureproofing. A platform that solves today’s problem may not be flexible enough for new biomarkers, software integrations, or AI-supported tools a few years from now, so the quality and adaptability of the workflow around the technology matter almost as much as the technology itself. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

Industry and academic signals point in the same direction. Cornell’s College of Veterinary Medicine recently highlighted that its anatomic pathology laboratory supports diagnostics, teaching, and research with a team that includes nine technicians specializing in histotechnology and necropsy procedures. Job postings from research institutions likewise show active demand for certified histology professionals in veterinary research settings. While that’s not direct commentary on the Animals paper, it reinforces the review’s central point: these roles are not peripheral support functions, but part of the operational core of modern veterinary pathology. It also fits with the way practices are increasingly being advised to think about diagnostics more strategically, including the hidden operational costs that come with new systems such as consumables, quality-control materials, service agreements, repeat testing due to errors, staff time, and the administrative burden tied to send-out testing. (vet.cornell.edu)

Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this review is less about title recognition and more about diagnostic resilience. Practices increasingly depend on outside labs and complex diagnostic pathways, and the quality of those results rests heavily on technical execution before interpretation. That includes safe specimen submission, correct fixation and labeling, clean chain-of-custody, consistent slide quality, and compatibility with digital systems. In a field already dealing with workforce strain in pathology and laboratory medicine, underinvesting in technician training or career development risks bottlenecks that can affect turnaround time, reproducibility, teaching quality, and ultimately patient care. It may also make it harder for hospitals to get real value from new diagnostic investments, especially when long-term contracts, bundled pricing, production thresholds, or underuse penalties reduce flexibility just as diagnostic needs are changing. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

The review also has implications for education. The authors argue that current training frameworks would better serve veterinary pathology if they included more veterinary-specific preparation, including comparative pathology, species-specific anatomy and pathology, necropsy technique, biosafety, and handling of animal-derived specimens. That aligns with broader academic discussion around digital pathology implementation, where laboratory needs in teaching and research settings are increasingly shaping infrastructure and staffing decisions. It also matches a wider practice-management message: the goal is not to adopt every available diagnostic option, but to build a curated diagnostic ecosystem that supports medical quality, sustainability, team efficiency, and client trust. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

What to watch: The next phase is likely to center on workforce recognition, veterinary-specific competency frameworks, and clearer validation standards for digital and AI-enabled pathology workflows, all areas where pathology technicians will be hard to separate from diagnostic quality itself. At the practice level, expect continued scrutiny of which diagnostic systems are truly scalable, interoperable, and workable for busy teams, rather than simply new. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)