Cargando…

Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies

BACKGROUND: Conventional white-light imaging endoscopy (C-WLI) had a significant number of misdiagnosis in early gastric cancer (EGC), and magnifying endoscopy (ME) combined with different optical imaging was more accurate in the diagnosis of EGC. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of ME and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Le, Hao, Wang, Lianjun, Zhang, Lan, Chen, Pengfei, Xu, Bin, Peng, Dengfa, Yang, Ming, Tan, Yong, Cai, Changsong, Li, Huqing, Zhao, Qiu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7837915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33545965
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023934
_version_ 1783643053295140864
author Le, Hao
Wang, Lianjun
Zhang, Lan
Chen, Pengfei
Xu, Bin
Peng, Dengfa
Yang, Ming
Tan, Yong
Cai, Changsong
Li, Huqing
Zhao, Qiu
author_facet Le, Hao
Wang, Lianjun
Zhang, Lan
Chen, Pengfei
Xu, Bin
Peng, Dengfa
Yang, Ming
Tan, Yong
Cai, Changsong
Li, Huqing
Zhao, Qiu
author_sort Le, Hao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Conventional white-light imaging endoscopy (C-WLI) had a significant number of misdiagnosis in early gastric cancer (EGC), and magnifying endoscopy (ME) combined with different optical imaging was more accurate in the diagnosis of EGC. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of ME and compare the accuracy of ME with different optical imaging in detecting EGC. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify all relevant studies. Pair-wise meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of ME, and Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to combine direct and indirect evidence and estimate the relative effects. RESULTS: Eight prospective studies were identified with a total of 5948 patients and 3 optical imaging in ME (ME with WLI (M-WLI), ME with narrow-band imaging (M-NBI), and ME with blue laser imaging (M-BLI)). Pair-wise meta-analysis showed a higher accuracy of ME than C-WLI (OR: 2.97, 95% CI: 1.68∼5.25). In network meta-analysis, both M-NBI and M-BLI were more accurate than M-WLI (OR: 2.56, 95% CI: 2.13∼3.13; OR: 3.13, 95% CI: 1.85∼5.71). There was no significant difference between M-NBI and M-BLI. CONCLUSION: ME was effective in improving the detecting rate of EGC, especially with NBI or BLI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7837915
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78379152021-01-27 Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies Le, Hao Wang, Lianjun Zhang, Lan Chen, Pengfei Xu, Bin Peng, Dengfa Yang, Ming Tan, Yong Cai, Changsong Li, Huqing Zhao, Qiu Medicine (Baltimore) 4500 BACKGROUND: Conventional white-light imaging endoscopy (C-WLI) had a significant number of misdiagnosis in early gastric cancer (EGC), and magnifying endoscopy (ME) combined with different optical imaging was more accurate in the diagnosis of EGC. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of ME and compare the accuracy of ME with different optical imaging in detecting EGC. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify all relevant studies. Pair-wise meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of ME, and Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to combine direct and indirect evidence and estimate the relative effects. RESULTS: Eight prospective studies were identified with a total of 5948 patients and 3 optical imaging in ME (ME with WLI (M-WLI), ME with narrow-band imaging (M-NBI), and ME with blue laser imaging (M-BLI)). Pair-wise meta-analysis showed a higher accuracy of ME than C-WLI (OR: 2.97, 95% CI: 1.68∼5.25). In network meta-analysis, both M-NBI and M-BLI were more accurate than M-WLI (OR: 2.56, 95% CI: 2.13∼3.13; OR: 3.13, 95% CI: 1.85∼5.71). There was no significant difference between M-NBI and M-BLI. CONCLUSION: ME was effective in improving the detecting rate of EGC, especially with NBI or BLI. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-01-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7837915/ /pubmed/33545965 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023934 Text en Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
spellingShingle 4500
Le, Hao
Wang, Lianjun
Zhang, Lan
Chen, Pengfei
Xu, Bin
Peng, Dengfa
Yang, Ming
Tan, Yong
Cai, Changsong
Li, Huqing
Zhao, Qiu
Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies
title Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies
title_full Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies
title_fullStr Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies
title_full_unstemmed Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies
title_short Magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies
title_sort magnifying endoscopy in detecting early gastric cancer: a network meta-analysis of prospective studies
topic 4500
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7837915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33545965
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023934
work_keys_str_mv AT lehao magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT wanglianjun magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT zhanglan magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT chenpengfei magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT xubin magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT pengdengfa magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT yangming magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT tanyong magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT caichangsong magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT lihuqing magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies
AT zhaoqiu magnifyingendoscopyindetectingearlygastriccanceranetworkmetaanalysisofprospectivestudies