Suppr超能文献

使用放大和非放大窄带成像内镜对胃小肠化生进行内镜分级

Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Using Magnifying and Nonmagnifying Narrow-Band Imaging Endoscopy.

作者信息

Kawamura Masashi, Koike Tomoyuki, Ogata Yohei, Matsumoto Ryotaro, Yano Kota, Hiratsuka Takashi, Ohyama Hideaki, Sato Isao, Kayada Kimiko, Suzuki Suguo, Hiratsuka Satsuki, Watanabe Yumiko

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Hospital, 1-1-1, Asutonagamachi, Taihaku-ku, Sendai 982-8502, Miyagi, Japan.

Division of Gastroenterology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1, Seiryo-machi, Sendai 980-8574, Miyagi, Japan.

出版信息

Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Dec 1;12(12):3012. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12123012.

Abstract

Several endoscopic findings obtained by magnifying image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) are reportedly correlated with gastric intestinal metaplasia (IM); however, the differences between magnifying and nonmagnifying IEE for the diagnosis of gastric IM remain unknown. This study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent narrow-band imaging endoscopy. Four areas of the stomach were evaluated using nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE. Light-blue crest (LBC), white opaque substance (WOS), and endoscopic grading of the gastric IM (EGGIM) were assessed. The concordance rates between nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE were 80.5% for LBC and 93.3% for WOS. The strength of agreement between each observation technique showed good reproducibility, with a kappa value of 0.69 and 0.83 for LBC and WOS, respectively. The individual EGGIM score indicated a good correlation between nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE (concordance rate, 75%; kappa value, 0.67). The prevalence of a high EGGIM score in patients with and without gastric cancer (GC) showed a significant difference both with nonmagnifying IEE (odds ratio (OR), 3.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-9.0), and magnifying IEE (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1-8.9). Nonmagnifying IEE has the potential to stratify the individual risk of GC, similar to magnifying IEE, warranting further investigation with histological assessment.

摘要

据报道,通过放大内镜图像增强内镜检查(IEE)获得的一些内镜检查结果与胃肠化生(IM)相关;然而,放大内镜与非放大内镜在诊断胃IM方面的差异仍不清楚。本研究纳入了100例连续接受窄带成像内镜检查的患者。使用非放大内镜和放大内镜对胃的四个区域进行评估。评估了淡蓝色嵴(LBC)、白色不透明物质(WOS)和胃IM的内镜分级(EGGIM)。LBC的非放大内镜与放大内镜的一致性率为80.5%,WOS为93.3%。每种观察技术之间的一致性强度显示出良好的可重复性,LBC和WOS的kappa值分别为0.69和0.83。个体EGGIM评分表明非放大内镜与放大内镜之间具有良好的相关性(一致性率为75%;kappa值为0.67)。无论有无胃癌(GC),EGGIM高评分患者的患病率在非放大内镜(优势比(OR),3.3;95%置信区间(CI),1.2 - 9.0)和放大内镜(OR,3.1;95%CI,1.1 - 8.9)下均显示出显著差异。非放大内镜与放大内镜类似,有可能对个体GC风险进行分层,值得进一步进行组织学评估研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eaef/9776966/194dad5cd8cd/diagnostics-12-03012-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验