Bugajski Marek, Kaminski Michal F, Orlowska Janina, Mroz Andrzej, Pachlewski Jacek, Rupinski Maciej, Zagorowicz Edyta, Rawa Tomasz, Regula Jaroslaw
Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre and Institute of Oncology , Warsaw , Poland.
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2015;50(10):1261-7. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2015.1024280. Epub 2015 Apr 11.
The aim of this analysis was to retrospectively review video recordings of malignant polyps <10 mm in search for suspicious macroscopic features in white light endoscopy.
Database entries and recordings of screening colonoscopies from a single tertiary referral center between June 2009 and December 2012 were reviewed. Malignant polyps <10 mm were analyzed. The recordings were reviewed by two expert endoscopists in search for suspicious morphological features: irregular contours, central depression, contact bleeding, shape deformity, central depression, chicken skin sign, circumscribed area with abnormal vascular and/or surface pattern. Then, six experienced endoscopists watched the recordings in search of listed features. Next, video recordings of these malignant polyps were mixed with randomly drawn video recordings of 20 non-malignant polyps matched by size and reviewed by 14 blinded endoscopists to assess the sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of malignant polyps.
Five of the 8651 (0.06%) subjects who underwent screening colonoscopy during the study period were diagnosed with a malignant polyp <10 mm. Only one of them was ad hoc identified by performing endoscopist as suspicious. On recordings review performed by the experts, each of the four remaining polyps presented at least one suspicious macroscopic feature. Presence of these features was confirmed by experienced endoscopists. The sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of malignant polyp were 73.21% and 85.35%, respectively, if at least two suspicious macroscopic features defined malignant polyp.
On careful white light endoscopy examination small malignant colorectal polyps show suspicious macroscopic features, which were frequently unrecognized by examining endoscopists.
本分析旨在回顾性研究直径小于10mm的恶性息肉的视频记录,以寻找白光内镜检查中可疑的宏观特征。
回顾了2009年6月至2012年12月间来自单一三级转诊中心的筛查结肠镜检查的数据库条目和记录。对直径小于10mm的恶性息肉进行分析。两名专家内镜医师对记录进行回顾,以寻找可疑的形态学特征:轮廓不规则、中央凹陷、接触性出血、形状畸形、中央凹陷、鸡皮征、血管和/或表面形态异常的边界区域。然后,六名经验丰富的内镜医师观看记录以寻找列出的特征。接下来,将这些恶性息肉的视频记录与随机抽取的20个大小匹配的非恶性息肉的视频记录混合,并由14名不知情的内镜医师进行评估,以评估诊断恶性息肉的敏感性和特异性。
在研究期间接受筛查结肠镜检查的8651名受试者中,有5名(0.06%)被诊断为直径小于10mm的恶性息肉。其中只有一名在进行内镜检查时被临时认定为可疑。在专家进行的记录回顾中,其余四个息肉中的每一个都至少呈现出一个可疑的宏观特征。经验丰富的内镜医师证实了这些特征的存在。如果至少两个可疑的宏观特征定义为恶性息肉,则诊断恶性息肉的敏感性和特异性分别为73.21%和85.35%。
在仔细的白光内镜检查中,小的结直肠恶性息肉显示出可疑的宏观特征,而这些特征在检查内镜医师中常常未被识别。