Cargando…
Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos
OBJECTIVES: High definition laryngoscopy (HDL) could lead to better interpretation of the pharyngeal and laryngeal mucosa than regularly used fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FOL). The primary aim of this study is to quantify the diagnostic advantage of HDL over FOL in detecting mucosal anomalies in general...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6972529/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31747481 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/coa.13476 |
_version_ | 1783489851701592064 |
---|---|
author | Scholman, Constanze Westra, Jeroen M. Zwakenberg, Manon A. Dikkers, Frederik G. Halmos, Gyorgy B. Wedman, Jan Wachters, Jan E. van der Laan, Bernard F.A.M. Plaat, Boudewijn E.C. |
author_facet | Scholman, Constanze Westra, Jeroen M. Zwakenberg, Manon A. Dikkers, Frederik G. Halmos, Gyorgy B. Wedman, Jan Wachters, Jan E. van der Laan, Bernard F.A.M. Plaat, Boudewijn E.C. |
author_sort | Scholman, Constanze |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: High definition laryngoscopy (HDL) could lead to better interpretation of the pharyngeal and laryngeal mucosa than regularly used fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FOL). The primary aim of this study is to quantify the diagnostic advantage of HDL over FOL in detecting mucosal anomalies in general, in differentiating malignant from benign lesions and in predicting specific histological entities. The secondary aim is to analyse image quality of both laryngoscopes. DESIGN: Retrospective paired analysis with multiple observers evaluating endoscopic videos simulating daily clinical practice. SETTING: A tertiary referral hospital. PARTICIPANTS: In 36 patients, both FOL and HDL videos were obtained. Six observers were provided with additional clinical information, and 36 FOL and HDL videos were evaluated in a randomised order. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of observers using both flexible laryngoscopes were calculated for detection of mucosal lesions in general and uncovering malignant lesions. Sensitivities were calculated for prediction of specific histological entities. Image quality (scale 1‐10) was assessed for both flexible laryngoscopes. RESULTS: HDL reached higher sensitivity compared to FOL for detection of mucosal abnormalities in general (96.0% vs 90.4%; P = .03), differentiating malignant from benign lesions (91.7% vs 79.8%; P = .03) and prediction of specific histological entities (59.7% vs 47.2%; P < .01). Image quality was judged better with HDL in comparison with FOL (mean: 8.4 vs 5.4, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: HDL is superior to FOL in detecting mucosal anomalies in general, malignancies and specific histological entities. Image quality is considered as superior using HDL compared to FOL. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6972529 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69725292020-01-27 Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos Scholman, Constanze Westra, Jeroen M. Zwakenberg, Manon A. Dikkers, Frederik G. Halmos, Gyorgy B. Wedman, Jan Wachters, Jan E. van der Laan, Bernard F.A.M. Plaat, Boudewijn E.C. Clin Otolaryngol Original Articles OBJECTIVES: High definition laryngoscopy (HDL) could lead to better interpretation of the pharyngeal and laryngeal mucosa than regularly used fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FOL). The primary aim of this study is to quantify the diagnostic advantage of HDL over FOL in detecting mucosal anomalies in general, in differentiating malignant from benign lesions and in predicting specific histological entities. The secondary aim is to analyse image quality of both laryngoscopes. DESIGN: Retrospective paired analysis with multiple observers evaluating endoscopic videos simulating daily clinical practice. SETTING: A tertiary referral hospital. PARTICIPANTS: In 36 patients, both FOL and HDL videos were obtained. Six observers were provided with additional clinical information, and 36 FOL and HDL videos were evaluated in a randomised order. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of observers using both flexible laryngoscopes were calculated for detection of mucosal lesions in general and uncovering malignant lesions. Sensitivities were calculated for prediction of specific histological entities. Image quality (scale 1‐10) was assessed for both flexible laryngoscopes. RESULTS: HDL reached higher sensitivity compared to FOL for detection of mucosal abnormalities in general (96.0% vs 90.4%; P = .03), differentiating malignant from benign lesions (91.7% vs 79.8%; P = .03) and prediction of specific histological entities (59.7% vs 47.2%; P < .01). Image quality was judged better with HDL in comparison with FOL (mean: 8.4 vs 5.4, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: HDL is superior to FOL in detecting mucosal anomalies in general, malignancies and specific histological entities. Image quality is considered as superior using HDL compared to FOL. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-06 2020-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6972529/ /pubmed/31747481 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/coa.13476 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Clinical Otolaryngology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Scholman, Constanze Westra, Jeroen M. Zwakenberg, Manon A. Dikkers, Frederik G. Halmos, Gyorgy B. Wedman, Jan Wachters, Jan E. van der Laan, Bernard F.A.M. Plaat, Boudewijn E.C. Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
title | Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
title_full | Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
title_fullStr | Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
title_short | Differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: A multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
title_sort | differences in the diagnostic value between fiberoptic and high definition laryngoscopy for the characterisation of pharyngeal and laryngeal lesions: a multi‐observer paired analysis of videos |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6972529/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31747481 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/coa.13476 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT scholmanconstanze differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT westrajeroenm differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT zwakenbergmanona differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT dikkersfrederikg differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT halmosgyorgyb differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT wedmanjan differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT wachtersjane differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT vanderlaanbernardfam differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos AT plaatboudewijnec differencesinthediagnosticvaluebetweenfiberopticandhighdefinitionlaryngoscopyforthecharacterisationofpharyngealandlaryngeallesionsamultiobserverpairedanalysisofvideos |