Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background/aims: In the past, dye-spraying chromoendoscopy was the technique of choice for colonic surveillance in patients with long-standing extensive inflammatory bowel disease. Recent evidence suggests that virtual chromoendoscopy is an equally acceptable technique.
Materials And Methods: Eleven gastroenterologists were given a survey with 20 pairs of pictures from inflammatory bowel disease surveillance colonoscopies (10 with nondysplastic lesions, 5 with dysplastic lesions, and 5 with no lesions). Each pair contained the same image captured during colonoscopy using indigo carmine and narrow-band imaging. For each picture, the gastroenterologist assessed the presence/absence of lesion and, when a lesion was identified, assessed the presence/absence of dysplasia and delineated its margins. To compare lesion and dysplasia detection between techniques, sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were calculated. The chi-square test was used to assess the accuracy of margins delineation.
Results: When assessing lesion and dysplasia detection, similar sensitivity and specificity values were obtained for both techniques. Interobserver agreement analysis revealed that dye-spraying chromoendoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy had a moderate agreement in lesion detection but, for dysplasia detection, dye-spraying chromoendoscopy had a slight agreement [K = 0.11 (0.03-0.18), P < .01] and virtual chromoendoscopy a fair agreement [K = 0.30 (0.22-0.37), P < .01]. Margin delineation was similar between techniques.
Conclusion: Sensitivity and specificity for lesion and dysplasia detection, as well as the accuracy of margins delineation, were similar between dye-spraying chromoendoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy. Interobserver agreement for dysplasia detection was suboptimal in both techniques; however, it was superior when using virtual chromoendoscopy. These findings suggest that virtual chromoendoscopy constitutes a valid alternative for dysplasia screening in inflammatory bowel disease.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10724759 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tjg.2023.22766 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!