Cargando…

Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND: In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a promising non‐invasive skin imaging technique that could facilitate early diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) instead of routine punch biopsies. However, the clinical value and utility of RCM vs. a punch biopsy in diagnosing and subt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kadouch, D.J., Leeflang, M.M., Elshot, Y.S., Longo, C., Ulrich, M., van der Wal, A.C., Wolkerstorfer, A., Bekkenk, M.W., de Rie, M.A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5697654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28370434
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.14253
_version_ 1783280658796249088
author Kadouch, D.J.
Leeflang, M.M.
Elshot, Y.S.
Longo, C.
Ulrich, M.
van der Wal, A.C.
Wolkerstorfer, A.
Bekkenk, M.W.
de Rie, M.A.
author_facet Kadouch, D.J.
Leeflang, M.M.
Elshot, Y.S.
Longo, C.
Ulrich, M.
van der Wal, A.C.
Wolkerstorfer, A.
Bekkenk, M.W.
de Rie, M.A.
author_sort Kadouch, D.J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a promising non‐invasive skin imaging technique that could facilitate early diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) instead of routine punch biopsies. However, the clinical value and utility of RCM vs. a punch biopsy in diagnosing and subtyping BCC is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess diagnostic accuracy of RCM vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping clinically suspected primary BCC. METHODS: A prospective, consecutive cohort of 100 patients with clinically suspected BCC were included at two tertiary hospitals in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, between 3 February 2015 and 2 October 2015. Patients were randomized between two test‐treatment pathways: diagnosing and subtyping using RCM imaging followed by direct surgical excision (RCM one‐stop‐shop) or planned excision based upon the histological diagnosis and subtype of punch biopsy (standard care). The primary outcome was the agreement between the index tests (RCM vs. punch biopsy) and reference standard (excision specimen) in correctly diagnosing BCC. The secondary outcome was the agreement between the index tests and reference standard in correctly identifying the most aggressive BCC subtypes. RESULTS: Sensitivity to detect BCC was similar for RCM and punch biopsy (100% vs. 93.94%), but a punch biopsy was more specific than RCM (79% vs. 38%). RCM expert evaluation for diagnosing BCC had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 75%. The agreement between RCM and excision specimen in identifying the most aggressive BCC subtype ranged from 50% to 85% vs. 77% by a punch biopsy. CONCLUSION: Reflectance confocal microscopy and punch biopsy have comparable diagnostic accuracy to diagnose and subtype BCC depending on RCM experience. Although experienced RCM users could accurately diagnose BCC at a distance, we found an important difference in subtyping BCC. Future RCM studies need to focus on diagnostic accuracy, reliability and specific criteria to improve BCC subtype differentiation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5697654
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56976542017-11-28 Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma Kadouch, D.J. Leeflang, M.M. Elshot, Y.S. Longo, C. Ulrich, M. van der Wal, A.C. Wolkerstorfer, A. Bekkenk, M.W. de Rie, M.A. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Original Articles and Short Reports BACKGROUND: In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a promising non‐invasive skin imaging technique that could facilitate early diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) instead of routine punch biopsies. However, the clinical value and utility of RCM vs. a punch biopsy in diagnosing and subtyping BCC is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess diagnostic accuracy of RCM vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping clinically suspected primary BCC. METHODS: A prospective, consecutive cohort of 100 patients with clinically suspected BCC were included at two tertiary hospitals in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, between 3 February 2015 and 2 October 2015. Patients were randomized between two test‐treatment pathways: diagnosing and subtyping using RCM imaging followed by direct surgical excision (RCM one‐stop‐shop) or planned excision based upon the histological diagnosis and subtype of punch biopsy (standard care). The primary outcome was the agreement between the index tests (RCM vs. punch biopsy) and reference standard (excision specimen) in correctly diagnosing BCC. The secondary outcome was the agreement between the index tests and reference standard in correctly identifying the most aggressive BCC subtypes. RESULTS: Sensitivity to detect BCC was similar for RCM and punch biopsy (100% vs. 93.94%), but a punch biopsy was more specific than RCM (79% vs. 38%). RCM expert evaluation for diagnosing BCC had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 75%. The agreement between RCM and excision specimen in identifying the most aggressive BCC subtype ranged from 50% to 85% vs. 77% by a punch biopsy. CONCLUSION: Reflectance confocal microscopy and punch biopsy have comparable diagnostic accuracy to diagnose and subtype BCC depending on RCM experience. Although experienced RCM users could accurately diagnose BCC at a distance, we found an important difference in subtyping BCC. Future RCM studies need to focus on diagnostic accuracy, reliability and specific criteria to improve BCC subtype differentiation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-08-11 2017-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5697654/ /pubmed/28370434 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.14253 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles and Short Reports
Kadouch, D.J.
Leeflang, M.M.
Elshot, Y.S.
Longo, C.
Ulrich, M.
van der Wal, A.C.
Wolkerstorfer, A.
Bekkenk, M.W.
de Rie, M.A.
Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
title Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
title_full Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
title_fullStr Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
title_short Diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of confocal microscopy imaging vs. punch biopsy for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma
topic Original Articles and Short Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5697654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28370434
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.14253
work_keys_str_mv AT kadouchdj diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT leeflangmm diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT elshotys diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT longoc diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT ulrichm diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT vanderwalac diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT wolkerstorfera diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT bekkenkmw diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma
AT deriema diagnosticaccuracyofconfocalmicroscopyimagingvspunchbiopsyfordiagnosingandsubtypingbasalcellcarcinoma