Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Key Laboratory of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ministry of Health, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Disease, Shanghai, China.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Liqun Clinical Medicine College, The Second Military Medical University, Liqun Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Endoscopy. 2017 Jun;49(6):564-580. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-103014. Epub 2017 May 4.
Magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (M-NBI) has been widely used in the differential diagnosis of deep submucosal colorectal cancers (dSMCs) from superficial submucosal cancers (sSMCs) and intramucosal neoplasms. We aimed to pool the diagnostic efficacy of M-NBI and compare it with that of magnifying chromoendoscopy (M-CE) in diagnosing colorectal dSMC. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify eligible studies. Meeting abstracts were also searched. A bivariate mixed-effects binary regression model was used in the meta-analysis to calculate the pooled diagnostic efficacy of M-NBI and compare it with that of M-CE in the diagnosis of dSMC. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to explore sources of heterogeneity. We included 17 studies: 14 full texts and 3 meeting abstracts. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) in diagnosing dSMC were 74 % (66 % - 81 %; I = 84.6 %), 98 % (94 % - 99 %; I = 94.4 %), and 0.91 (0.88 - 0.93), respectively, for M-NBI. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC (95 %CI) were 84 % (76 % - 89 %; I = 76.9 %), 97 % (94 % - 99 %; I = 90.2 %), and 0.97 (0.95 - 0.98), respectively, for M-CE. M-NBI had lower sensitivity ( < 0.01) than M-CE with similar specificity ( = 0.32). Subgroup analyses and meta-regression indicated that endoscopic diagnostic criteria, study type, endoscope type, risk of index test bias, and histopathological diagnostic criteria might be the sources of heterogeneity. M-NBI and M-CE had comparable specificities in diagnosing dSMC, but the sensitivity of M-NBI was slightly lower than that of M-CE.
窄带成像放大内镜(M-NBI)已广泛应用于深部黏膜下结直肠癌(dSMC)与浅层黏膜下癌(sSMC)和黏膜内肿瘤的鉴别诊断。本研究旨在汇总 M-NBI 的诊断效能,并与放大染色内镜(M-CE)的诊断效能进行比较,以评估其对 dSMC 的诊断价值。我们检索了 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆以识别合格的研究,还检索了会议摘要。使用双变量混合效应二分类回归模型进行荟萃分析,计算 M-NBI 的汇总诊断效能,并与 M-CE 诊断 dSMC 的效能进行比较。进行亚组分析和 meta 回归以探索异质性来源。我们纳入了 17 项研究:14 篇全文和 3 篇会议摘要。汇总分析显示,M-NBI 诊断 dSMC 的敏感度、特异度和汇总受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)及其 95%置信区间(CI)分别为 74%(66%-81%;I=84.6%)、98%(94%-99%;I=94.4%)和 0.91(0.88-0.93)。M-CE 诊断 dSMC 的敏感度、特异度和 AUC(95%CI)分别为 84%(76%-89%;I=76.9%)、97%(94%-99%;I=90.2%)和 0.97(0.95-0.98)。M-NBI 的敏感度显著低于 M-CE(P<0.01),而特异度相当(P=0.32)。亚组分析和 meta 回归提示,内镜诊断标准、研究类型、内镜类型、检测偏倚风险和组织病理学诊断标准可能是异质性的来源。M-NBI 和 M-CE 诊断 dSMC 的特异度相当,但 M-NBI 的敏感度略低于 M-CE。