Department of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Clin Otolaryngol. 2019 Jan;44(1):39-46. doi: 10.1111/coa.13229. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
The primary goal was to study the diagnostic potential of narrow-band imaging (NBI), and the secondary goal was to evaluate the most common mistakes when using and interpreting NBI.
Retrospective study.
University Medical Center Groningen, tertiary referral hospital, the Netherlands.
Three hundred and seventy patients who underwent rigid endoscopy of the upper aerodigestive tract. Two observers assessed all lesions. Twelve observers assessed a selection of 100 lesions. All observers were provided with both white light imaging and NBI.
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy and reasons for insufficient photograph quality.
When using NBI, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy for detecting invasive carcinoma, carcinoma in situ or high-grade dysplasia were 92%, 68%, 61%, 94% and 77%, respectively. In multiple-observer analysis, values were 76%, 58%, 53%, 83% and 65% with the evaluation strictly based on type V patterns of Ni's classification, vs 83%, 68%, 64%, 85% and 74% when evaluation was also based on lesion-specific clinical characteristics. Lesions that caused misinterpretations were leukoplakia, papillomas and mucosal lesions after irradiation. In total, 185 photographs were assessed to be of suboptimal quality due to blurring (36%), bleeding (6%), insufficient zooming (15%) and/or insufficient lighting (17%).
NBI is a relatively reliable screening method for detecting malignancy. Evaluation based on Ni's classification alone is not sufficient. To optimise NBI photograph quality, we recommend sufficient zooming and prevention of bleeding, blurring and inadequate lighting.
主要目标是研究窄带成像(NBI)的诊断潜力,次要目标是评估使用和解释 NBI 时最常见的错误。
回顾性研究。
荷兰格罗宁根大学医学中心,三级转诊医院。
370 名接受上呼吸道刚性内镜检查的患者。两名观察者评估所有病变。12 名观察者评估了 100 个病变的选择。所有观察者都提供了白光成像和 NBI。
敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)、准确性和照片质量不足的原因。
使用 NBI 时,检测浸润性癌、原位癌或高级别异型增生的敏感性、特异性、PPV、NPV 和准确性分别为 92%、68%、61%、94%和 77%。在多观察者分析中,当评估严格基于 Ni 分类的 V 型模式时,值分别为 76%、58%、53%、83%和 65%,而当评估还基于病变特异性临床特征时,值分别为 83%、68%、64%、85%和 74%。导致误诊的病变是白斑、乳头状瘤和放射后黏膜病变。共有 185 张照片因模糊(36%)、出血(6%)、缩放不足(15%)和/或照明不足(17%)而被评估为质量不佳。
NBI 是一种相对可靠的筛查方法,用于检测恶性肿瘤。仅基于 Ni 分类的评估是不够的。为了优化 NBI 照片质量,我们建议充分缩放并防止出血、模糊和照明不足。