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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |