Suppr超能文献

与放大内镜联合窄带成像相比,内镜下细胞分光镜检查在胃癌诊断中的性能更高。

Diagnostic performance in gastric cancer is higher using endocytoscopy with narrow-band imaging than using magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Cancer Institute Hospital (Ringgold ID: 117105), 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.

Department of Clinical Trial Planning and Management, Cancer Institute Hospital (Ringgold ID: 117105), Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Gastric Cancer. 2021 Mar;24(2):417-427. doi: 10.1007/s10120-020-01125-w. Epub 2020 Oct 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

For diagnosing gastric cancer, differences in the diagnostic performance between endocytoscopy with narrow-band imaging and magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging have not been reported. We aimed to clarify these differences by analyzing diagnoses made by endoscopists in Japan.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study used 106 cancerous and 106 non-cancerous images obtained via both modalities (total, 424 images) for diagnosis. Sixty-one endoscopists with varying experience levels from 45 institutions were included. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were evaluated to determine the diagnostic performance of each modality and compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Among all endoscopists, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were higher with endocytoscopy with narrow-band imaging than with magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (percentage [95% confidence interval]: 78.8% [76.4-83.0%] versus 72.2% [69.3-73.6%], p < 0.0001; 82.1% [78.3-85.9%] versus 64.2% [60.4-69.8%], p < 0.0001; 88.7% [82.6-90.7%] versus 78.5% [75.4-85.1%], p = 0.0023; 79.0% [75.3-80.5%] versus 68.5% [66.4-71.6%], p < 0.0001, respectively). In the magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging-trained group, these values were also higher with endocytoscopy with narrow-band imaging than with magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0001, p = 0.0143, and p < 0.0001, respectively). Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive value were higher with endocytoscopy with narrow-band imaging than with magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging in the magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging-untrained group (p = 0.0041, p = 0.0049, and p = 0.0098, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic performance was higher using endocytoscopy with narrow-band imaging than using magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging. Our results may help change the technique used to diagnose gastric cancer.

摘要

背景

在诊断胃癌方面,内镜下窄带成像与放大内镜下窄带成像的诊断性能差异尚未见报道。我们旨在通过分析日本内镜医师的诊断结果来阐明这些差异。

方法

本单中心回顾性队列研究使用了两种模式(共 424 张图像)获得的 106 张癌性和 106 张非癌性图像进行诊断。共纳入了来自 45 个机构的 61 名具有不同经验水平的内镜医师。使用 Mann-Whitney U 检验评估每种模式的诊断准确性、敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值和阴性预测值,以确定每种模式的诊断性能,并进行比较。

结果

在所有内镜医师中,内镜下窄带成像的诊断准确性、敏感度、阳性预测值和阴性预测值均高于放大内镜下窄带成像(百分比[95%置信区间]:78.8%[76.4-83.0%] 与 72.2%[69.3-73.6%],p<0.0001;82.1%[78.3-85.9%] 与 64.2%[60.4-69.8%],p<0.0001;88.7%[82.6-90.7%] 与 78.5%[75.4-85.1%],p=0.0023;79.0%[75.3-80.5%] 与 68.5%[66.4-71.6%],p<0.0001)。在接受放大内镜下窄带成像培训的组中,内镜下窄带成像的这些值也高于放大内镜下窄带成像(p<0.0001,p=0.0001,p=0.0143,p<0.0001)。在未接受放大内镜下窄带成像培训的组中,内镜下窄带成像的诊断准确性、敏感度和阴性预测值均高于放大内镜下窄带成像(p=0.0041,p=0.0049,p=0.0098)。

结论

内镜下窄带成像的诊断性能优于放大内镜下窄带成像。我们的结果可能有助于改变诊断胃癌的技术。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验