...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology >Ease of early gastric cancer demarcation recognition: a comparison of four magnifying endoscopy methods.
【24h】

Ease of early gastric cancer demarcation recognition: a comparison of four magnifying endoscopy methods.

机译:易于早期胃癌分界识别:四种放大内窥镜方法的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Various techniques using magnifying endoscopy (ME) have been developed to enhance images of early gastric cancer (EGC) demarcations, which are often obscure. We investigated four ME methods to determine which is most effective in enhancing the recognition of EGC demarcations: conventional ME (CME), ME with narrow band imaging (NBI-ME), enhanced-magnification endoscopy with acetic acid (EME), and ME with NBI and acetic acid (NBI-EME). METHODS: Thirty-seven successive patients having a total of 40 EGCs participated in the investigation. The endoscope was fixed and magnification images of EGC demarcations in each patient were recorded using four different ME methods (CME, NBI-ME, EME and NBI-EME). Eight experts and eight non-experts scored each of the four images of each lesion for ease of recognition of demarcation (1 to 4, with 4 being easiest). RESULTS: The mean scores of expert and non-expert judges, respectively, for images acquired using each technique were: CME 1.23, 1.24; NBI-ME 2.61, 2.95; EME 2.62, 2.32 and NBI-EME 3.54, 3.50. There were significant differences between the mean scores for the four techniques (P < 0.0001) using one-way repeated-measures anova. In a Bonferroni's multiple comparison, the average scores (expert and non-expert) of images acquired using NBI-EME were significantly higher than those acquired using other methods; images acquired by NBI-ME or EME also scored significantly higher than those by CME. Non-experts also scored NBI-ME images significantly higher than CME and EME images. CONCLUSIONS: Early gastric cancer demarcations were recognized most easily using NBI-EME, and more easily using EME or NBI-ME than CME.
机译:背景与目的:已经开发出各种使用放大内窥镜(ME)的技术来增强早期胃癌(EGC)界限的图像,这些界限通常是晦涩的。我们研究了四种ME方法以确定哪种方法最有效地增强了对EGC界线的识别:常规ME(CME),具有窄带成像的ME(NBI-ME),具有乙酸的增强放大内窥镜(EME)以及具有ME的ME NBI和乙酸(NBI-EME)。方法:37例连续的患者共40个EGC参与了研究。固定内窥镜,并使用四种不同的ME方法(CME,NBI-ME,EME和NBI-EME)记录每位患者的EGC分界的放大图像。为了容易识别划界,八位专家和八位非专家对每个病变的四个图像分别评分(1到4,最简单的是4个)。结果:使用每种技术获得的图像的专家和非专家法官的平均得分分别为:CME 1.23、1.24; NBI-ME 2.61,2.95; EME 2.62、2.32和NBI-EME 3.54、3.50。使用单向重复测量方差分析,四种技术的平均得分之间存在显着差异(P <0.0001)。在Bonferroni的多重比较中,使用NBI-EME获得的图像的平均得分(专家和非专家)显着高于使用其他方法获得的图像; NBI-ME或EME获得的图像得分也远高于CME。非专家对NBI-ME图像的评分也明显高于CME和EME图像。结论:与CME相比,使用NBI-EME最容易识别早期胃癌分界,而使用EME或NBI-ME更容易识别。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号