...
首页> 外文期刊>Gut: Journal of the British Society of Gastroenterology >Comparison of detection and miss rates of narrow band imaging, flexible spectral imaging chromoendoscopy and white light at screening colonoscopy: A randomised controlled back-to-back study
【24h】

Comparison of detection and miss rates of narrow band imaging, flexible spectral imaging chromoendoscopy and white light at screening colonoscopy: A randomised controlled back-to-back study

机译:结肠镜筛查时窄带成像,柔性光谱成像,内窥镜和白光的检出率和漏检率的比较:一项随机对照的背对背研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: Virtual chromoendoscopy (CE) is expected to enhance adenoma yield and reduce variation in performance between colonoscopists. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of narrow band imaging (NBI), flexible spectral imaging CE (FICE) and white light (WL) colonoscopy and their impact for less experienced endoscopists. Methods: We performed a randomised tandem colonoscopy trial controlling for withdrawal time and bowel preparation. Average-risk adults undergoing screening colonoscopy were enrolled and randomly assigned to first withdrawal with one of the three imaging modalities (NBI (NBI-WL group), FICE (FICE-WL group) and WL (WL-WL group)). Eight colonoscopists were categorised into expert and non-expert subgroups. Results: 1650 subjects (mean age 51.4 years, 63.9% men) were included (550 in each group). Compared with WL, neither NBI nor FICE increased the mean number of adenomas detected per patient (0.37 vs 0.35 and 0.36; p=0.591) or the percentage of patients with adenoma (25.3% vs 24.5% and 23.6%; p=0.753). For all three modalities, expert subgroups had higher yields of adenomas than non-expert subgroups. Learning curves were observed only for non-expert subgroups with all three modalities. The percentage of missed adenomas did not differ between the three groups (20.8% by WL vs 22.9% by NBI and 26.0% by FICE, p=0.300) and was not affected by endoscopists' expertise. Conclusions: Neither NBI nor FICE improved adenoma detection or miss rates, with no difference in diagnostic efficacy between the two systems. Virtual CE had no additional benefits over WL for non-experts. Clinical trial registration number: KCT0000570.
机译:目的:虚拟内窥镜检查(CE)有望提高腺瘤的产量并减少结肠镜医师之间的表现差异。这项研究旨在比较窄带成像(NBI),柔性光谱成像CE(FICE)和白光(WL)结肠镜检查的功效及其对经验不足的内镜医师的影响。方法:我们进行了一项随机串联结肠镜检查试验,以控制停药时间和肠道准备。接受筛查结肠镜检查的高危成人入组,并随机分配为三种成像方式(NBI(NBI-WL组),FICE(FICE-WL组)和WL(WL-WL组))之一进行初次戒断。八名结肠镜医师被分为专家和非专家亚组。结果:纳入1650名受试者(平均年龄51.4岁,男性占63.9%)(每组550名)。与WL相比,NBI和FICE均未增加每名患者检测到的平均腺瘤数量(0.37 vs 0.35和0.36; p = 0.591)或腺瘤患者的百分比(25.3%vs 24.5%和23.6%; p = 0.753)。对于所有这三种方式,专家组的腺瘤产生率均高于非专家组。仅在具有所有三种模式的非专家亚组中观察到学习曲线。三组之间漏诊腺瘤的百分比没有差异(WL组为20.8%,NBI组为22.9%,FICE组为26.0%,p = 0.300),并且不受内镜医师专长的影响。结论:NBI和FICE均未改善腺瘤的检出率或漏诊率,两个系统的诊断功效没有差异。对于非专业人士来说,虚拟CE不会比WL带来更多好处。临床试验注册号:KCT0000570。

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