| Literature DB >> 22748141 |
Eiji Sakai1, Hiroki Endo, Shingo Kato, Tetsuya Matsuura, Wataru Tomeno, Leo Taniguchi, Takashi Uchiyama, Yasuo Hata, Eiji Yamada, Hidenori Ohkubo, Takuma Higrashi, Kunihiro Hosono, Hirokazu Takahashi, Atsushi Nakajima.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Capsule endoscopy with flexible spectral imaging color enhancement (CE-FICE) has been reported to improve the visualization and detection of small-bowel lesions, however, its clinical usefulness is still not established. Therefore, we conducted a study to evaluate whether CE-FICE contributes to improve the detectability of small-bowel lesions by CE trainees.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22748141 PMCID: PMC3444425 DOI: 10.1186/1471-230X-12-83
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
Figure 1Example of an erosive lesion. The lesion is more clearly visualized by CE-FICE. A: conventional CE image. B-D: CE-FICE images obtained under three different wavelength settings (B: setting 1, C: setting 2. D: setting 3).
Figure 2Definitions of the bile-pigment-positive and bile-pigment-negative condition. CE experts selected 20 obviously bile-pigment-positive endoscopic images (A) and 20 bile-pigment-negative endoscopic images (B) that contained small bowel lesions. These images were regarded as golden standard. For each of the images, the RBG (red, blue and green) and brightness (average of ten mucosal points around the small bowel lesions, shown as white dots in this figure) values were calculated. To evaluate the most useful factor for determining whether or not bile pigments are present, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed (C). The curve was obtained by calculating the sensitivity and specificity of the test at every possible cutoff point, and plotting the sensitivity against 1-specificity. The sensitivity was defined as the proportion of bile-pigment-positive images, determined from each of the color values (RBG and brightness value). The specificity was defined as the proportion of bile-pigment-negative images, also determined from the color values. As shown in Table, the results revealed that the B value was the most useful factor to determine the bile pigment condition (area under the curve (AUC): 0.95, P < 0.0001).
Figure 3Definition of bowel visibility. Visibility was evaluated using a 4-point qualitative evaluation scale: A = excellent, visualization of ≥90% of the mucosa, no or minimal fluid, debris and bubbles; B = good, visualization of ≥90% of the mucosa, mild fluid, debris and bubbles; C = fair, visualization of <90% of the mucosa, moderate fluid, debris and bubbles; D = poor, visualization of <80% of the mucosa, excessive fluid, debris and bubbles.
Evaluation of the lesion detection rate by the CE trainees for each FICE setting
| Angioectasia | 60 (100) | 26 (43.3) | 40 (66.7)* | 38 (63.3)* | 31 (51.7) |
| Erosion/ulceration | 82 (100) | 38 (46.3) | 62 (75.6)† | 60 (73.2)† | 20 (24.4)‡ |
*Comparison of conventional CE with FICE settings 1 and 2 by the chi-squared test (P = 0.0017 and P = 0.014, respectively).
†Comparison of conventional CE with FICE settings 1 and 2 by the chi-squared test (P = 0.0012 and P = 0.0094, respectively).
‡Comparison of conventional CE with FICE setting 3 by the chi-squared test (P = 0.015).
Figure 4Evaluation of the lesion detection rate according to the bile pigment condition. The lesion detection rate under the conventional CE setting and FICE setting 2 were significantly reduced in the presence of bile pigments in the small bowel (*). On the other hand, the lesion detection rate under FICE setting 1 was not affected by the presence of bile pigments. In the bile-pigment-positive condition, the lesion detection rate under FICE setting 1 was significantly higher than that by conventional CE (†).
Evaluation of the number of false-positive findings for each visibility score
| Visibility score | | | | | |
| excellent | 7 | 0.1 ± 0.4 | 0.1 ± 0.4 | 0.3 ± 0.5 | 0.4 ± 0.5 |
| good | 13 | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.2 ± 0.6 | 0.2 ± 0.4 | 0.5 ± 0.7 |
| fair | 20 | 0.6 ± 0.8 | 0.9 ± 1.0 | 1.2 ± 1.1 | 1.7 ± 1.4* |
| poor | 8 | 0.9 ± 0.6 | 1.6 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 1.9† | 2.6 ± 1.8† |
NOTE: Each of the 12 CE videos was divided into four segments of equal length, according to the small bowel transit time, and landmarks were placed to identify the last 10 minutes of every quartile. The CE experts evaluated the visibility of the each segment of 10 minutes' duration using a 4-point qualitative index (excellent, good, fair and poor).
Values are mean ± SD.
*Comparison of conventional CE with FICE setting 3 by the Mann–Whitney U test (P = 0.018).
†Comparison of conventional CE with FICE settings 2 and 3 by the Mann–Whitney U test (P = 0.046 and P = 0.024).