Cargando…

Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination (COE) versus incisional or excisional biopsy for the diagnosis of malignant and/or dysplastic lesions in patients with clinically evident lesions. Searches were conducted across five electronic databases from i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Essat, Munira, Cooper, Katy, Bessey, Alice, Clowes, Mark, Chilcott, James B., Hunter, Keith D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35092324
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.26992
_version_ 1784752553003581440
author Essat, Munira
Cooper, Katy
Bessey, Alice
Clowes, Mark
Chilcott, James B.
Hunter, Keith D.
author_facet Essat, Munira
Cooper, Katy
Bessey, Alice
Clowes, Mark
Chilcott, James B.
Hunter, Keith D.
author_sort Essat, Munira
collection PubMed
description This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination (COE) versus incisional or excisional biopsy for the diagnosis of malignant and/or dysplastic lesions in patients with clinically evident lesions. Searches were conducted across five electronic databases from inception to January 2020. Meta‐analyses were undertaken, where appropriate. Among 18 included studies, 14 studies were included in the meta‐analysis, giving summary estimates for COE of 71% sensitivity and 85% specificity for the diagnosis of dysplastic and/or malignant lesions. The pooled diagnostic accuracy of identifying malignant‐only lesions was reported in seven studies, giving a pooled estimate of 88% sensitivity and 81% specificity. Diagnostic accuracy of different types of dental/medical professionals in identifying dysplastic or malignant lesions gave varying estimates of sensitivity and specificity across three studies. Further research is needed to improve the diagnostic accuracy of COE for early detection of dysplastic and malignant oral lesions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9306506
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93065062022-07-28 Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis Essat, Munira Cooper, Katy Bessey, Alice Clowes, Mark Chilcott, James B. Hunter, Keith D. Head Neck Clinical Reviews This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination (COE) versus incisional or excisional biopsy for the diagnosis of malignant and/or dysplastic lesions in patients with clinically evident lesions. Searches were conducted across five electronic databases from inception to January 2020. Meta‐analyses were undertaken, where appropriate. Among 18 included studies, 14 studies were included in the meta‐analysis, giving summary estimates for COE of 71% sensitivity and 85% specificity for the diagnosis of dysplastic and/or malignant lesions. The pooled diagnostic accuracy of identifying malignant‐only lesions was reported in seven studies, giving a pooled estimate of 88% sensitivity and 81% specificity. Diagnostic accuracy of different types of dental/medical professionals in identifying dysplastic or malignant lesions gave varying estimates of sensitivity and specificity across three studies. Further research is needed to improve the diagnostic accuracy of COE for early detection of dysplastic and malignant oral lesions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022-01-29 2022-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9306506/ /pubmed/35092324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.26992 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Head & Neck published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Reviews
Essat, Munira
Cooper, Katy
Bessey, Alice
Clowes, Mark
Chilcott, James B.
Hunter, Keith D.
Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
title Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_full Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_short Diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination for detecting oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients with clinically evident oral lesions: systematic review and meta‐analysis
topic Clinical Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35092324
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.26992
work_keys_str_mv AT essatmunira diagnosticaccuracyofconventionaloralexaminationfordetectingoralcavitycancerandpotentiallymalignantdisordersinpatientswithclinicallyevidentorallesionssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT cooperkaty diagnosticaccuracyofconventionaloralexaminationfordetectingoralcavitycancerandpotentiallymalignantdisordersinpatientswithclinicallyevidentorallesionssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT besseyalice diagnosticaccuracyofconventionaloralexaminationfordetectingoralcavitycancerandpotentiallymalignantdisordersinpatientswithclinicallyevidentorallesionssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT clowesmark diagnosticaccuracyofconventionaloralexaminationfordetectingoralcavitycancerandpotentiallymalignantdisordersinpatientswithclinicallyevidentorallesionssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chilcottjamesb diagnosticaccuracyofconventionaloralexaminationfordetectingoralcavitycancerandpotentiallymalignantdisordersinpatientswithclinicallyevidentorallesionssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hunterkeithd diagnosticaccuracyofconventionaloralexaminationfordetectingoralcavitycancerandpotentiallymalignantdisordersinpatientswithclinicallyevidentorallesionssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis