Cargando…

Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of a low cost magnifying device (Magnivisualizer) compared to a standard optical colposcope for detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions of the uterine cervix. METHODS: A total of 659 consecutive symptomatic women attending a gynecologic outpatient clinic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Veena, Parashari, Aditya, Gupta, Sanjay, Sodhani, Pushpa, Sehgal, Ashok
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology; Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4195297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25142620
http://dx.doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2014.25.4.282
_version_ 1782339289853460480
author Singh, Veena
Parashari, Aditya
Gupta, Sanjay
Sodhani, Pushpa
Sehgal, Ashok
author_facet Singh, Veena
Parashari, Aditya
Gupta, Sanjay
Sodhani, Pushpa
Sehgal, Ashok
author_sort Singh, Veena
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of a low cost magnifying device (Magnivisualizer) compared to a standard optical colposcope for detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions of the uterine cervix. METHODS: A total of 659 consecutive symptomatic women attending a gynecologic outpatient clinic underwent unaided visual inspection followed by cytology, visual inspection of the cervix using 5% acetic acid (VIA), and VIA under magnification (VIAM) with the Magnivisualizer. All women, independently of test results, were referred for colposcopic examination. Colposcopic-directed biopsies were obtained from all positive lesions and compared to positive VIAM cases. RESULTS: The detection rate for VIA positive lesions was 12% (134/659), while it was 29% for VIAM positive lesions (191/659). The sensitivities of detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 and higher lesions were 61.7% for VIA, 88.3% for VIAM, and 86.7% for colposcopy, with a specificity of 58.5% for VIA, 55.8% for VIAM, and 90.4% for colposcopy. The performance of colposcopy and VIAM was moderate (κ, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.54) for detection of CIN 1 and higher lesions and excellent (κ, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.94) for detection of CIN 2 and higher lesions. CONCLUSION: In low resource settings, where colposcopic facilities are not available at the community level, a simple low-cost, handheld Magnivisualizer can be considered a valid option for detection of cervical precancerous and cancerous lesions. However, it cannot replace traditional colposcopy because it has a low specificity that results in many unnecessary biopsies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4195297
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology; Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41952972014-10-14 Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix Singh, Veena Parashari, Aditya Gupta, Sanjay Sodhani, Pushpa Sehgal, Ashok J Gynecol Oncol Original Article OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of a low cost magnifying device (Magnivisualizer) compared to a standard optical colposcope for detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions of the uterine cervix. METHODS: A total of 659 consecutive symptomatic women attending a gynecologic outpatient clinic underwent unaided visual inspection followed by cytology, visual inspection of the cervix using 5% acetic acid (VIA), and VIA under magnification (VIAM) with the Magnivisualizer. All women, independently of test results, were referred for colposcopic examination. Colposcopic-directed biopsies were obtained from all positive lesions and compared to positive VIAM cases. RESULTS: The detection rate for VIA positive lesions was 12% (134/659), while it was 29% for VIAM positive lesions (191/659). The sensitivities of detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 and higher lesions were 61.7% for VIA, 88.3% for VIAM, and 86.7% for colposcopy, with a specificity of 58.5% for VIA, 55.8% for VIAM, and 90.4% for colposcopy. The performance of colposcopy and VIAM was moderate (κ, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.54) for detection of CIN 1 and higher lesions and excellent (κ, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.94) for detection of CIN 2 and higher lesions. CONCLUSION: In low resource settings, where colposcopic facilities are not available at the community level, a simple low-cost, handheld Magnivisualizer can be considered a valid option for detection of cervical precancerous and cancerous lesions. However, it cannot replace traditional colposcopy because it has a low specificity that results in many unnecessary biopsies. Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology; Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology 2014-10 2014-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4195297/ /pubmed/25142620 http://dx.doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2014.25.4.282 Text en Copyright © 2014. Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Singh, Veena
Parashari, Aditya
Gupta, Sanjay
Sodhani, Pushpa
Sehgal, Ashok
Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
title Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
title_full Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
title_fullStr Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
title_full_unstemmed Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
title_short Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
title_sort performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4195297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25142620
http://dx.doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2014.25.4.282
work_keys_str_mv AT singhveena performanceofalowcostmagnifyingdevicemagnivisualizerversuscolposcopefordetectionofprecancerandcancerouslesionsofuterinecervix
AT parashariaditya performanceofalowcostmagnifyingdevicemagnivisualizerversuscolposcopefordetectionofprecancerandcancerouslesionsofuterinecervix
AT guptasanjay performanceofalowcostmagnifyingdevicemagnivisualizerversuscolposcopefordetectionofprecancerandcancerouslesionsofuterinecervix
AT sodhanipushpa performanceofalowcostmagnifyingdevicemagnivisualizerversuscolposcopefordetectionofprecancerandcancerouslesionsofuterinecervix
AT sehgalashok performanceofalowcostmagnifyingdevicemagnivisualizerversuscolposcopefordetectionofprecancerandcancerouslesionsofuterinecervix