Literature DB >> 24515919

Distal chip versus fiberoptic laryngoscopy using endoscopic sheaths: diagnostic accuracy and image quality.

Boudewijn E C Plaat1, Bernard F A M van der Laan, Jan Wedman, György B Halmos, Frederik G Dikkers.   

Abstract

Laryngeal visualization is the hallmark in the diagnostic approach of laryngeal disease. In addition to fiberoptic techniques, digital distal chip technology has been developed to improve visualization. Endoscopic sheaths are used in daily clinical practice to prevent cross-contamination. The objective of the study was to evaluate diagnostic accuracy, image quality and interrater reliability of both flexible distal chip laryngoscopy (DCL) and flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FOL) using contamination preventing endoscopic sheaths. In 53 cases both DCL and FOL images were collected during routine examination using endoscopic sheaths. All images were randomly shown to four experts in the field of laryngology and head and neck oncology. Observers were asked to choose a diagnosis, express their confidence level of that diagnosis and validate image quality: in this way 420 observations (four observers using two techniques) were analyzed. Accuracy in detecting laryngeal disease was 78 % (both DCL and FOL). Confidence level of diagnosis tended to be higher in DCL (p = 0.05). Image quality was validated better in DCL as compared to FOL (p < 0.05). Interrater agreement in identifying laryngeal disease was 1.5 times higher in DCL (κ = 0.44) as compared to FOL (κ = 0.29). In this study, reflecting daily clinical setting using sheathed endoscopes, DCL is identical to FOL regarding diagnostic accuracy, but DCL is superior to FOL in image quality and interrater reliability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24515919     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-014-2916-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  15 in total

1.  Fibreoptic laryngoscopy in the assessment of laryngeal disorders.

Authors:  G T Williams; I M Farquharson; J Anthony
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  1975-03       Impact factor: 1.469

2.  Digital image processing of laryngeal lesions by electronic videoendoscopy.

Authors:  Masahiro Kawaida; Hiroyuki Fukuda; Naoyuki Kohno
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  The physiologic impact of transnasal flexible endoscopy.

Authors:  Julina Ongkasuwan; Katherine C Yung; Mark S Courey
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic.

Authors:  Anthony J Viera; Joanne M Garrett
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.756

5.  A comparison of two methods for preventing cross-contamination when using flexible fiberoptic endoscopes in an otolaryngology clinic: disposable sterile sheaths versus immersion in germicidal liquid.

Authors:  Alphi Elackattu; Mary Zoccoli; Jeffrey H Spiegel; Kenneth M Grundfast
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 6.  Topical anaesthetic or vasoconstrictor preparations for flexible fibre-optic nasal pharyngoscopy and laryngoscopy.

Authors:  Vishnu S Sunkaraneni; Stephen Em Jones
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-03-16

7.  Learning curve for competency in flexible laryngoscopy.

Authors:  Kulsoom Laeeq; Vinciya Pandian; Margret Skinner; Hamid Masood; Charles M Stewart; Robert Weatherly; Charles W Cummings; Nasir I Bhatti
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Flexible laryngoscopy: a comparison of fiber optic and distal chip technologies. Part 1: vocal fold masses.

Authors:  Robert Eller; Mark Ginsburg; Deborah Lurie; Yolanda Heman-Ackah; Karen Lyons; Robert Sataloff
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 2.009

9.  Diagnostic accuracy of history, laryngoscopy, and stroboscopy.

Authors:  Benjamin C Paul; Si Chen; Shaum Sridharan; Yixin Fang; Milan R Amin; Ryan C Branski
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Morbidity and patient perception of flexible laryngoscopy.

Authors:  Benjamin C Paul; Benjamin Rafii; Stratos Achlatis; Milan R Amin; Ryan C Branski
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.547

View more
  4 in total

1.  The effect of endoscopic sheaths on visualization in distal chip and fiberoptic laryngoscopy.

Authors:  Boudewijn E C Plaat; Bernard F A M van der Laan; Jan Wedman; György B Halmos; Frederik G Dikkers
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Evaluating the Quality of Rigid Optic Videolaryngoscopy Image Taken Through Dental Protection Cap and Its Feasibility as Additional Barrier Method Against COVID-19.

Authors:  Mariana Nagata Cavalheiro; Vinicius Ribas Fonseca; Bianca Simone Zeigelboim; Diego F Costa; Lucas Viomar de Lima; Marlon Kleber Bozzo; Rita de Cássia Tonochi; Bruno Ceron Hartmann
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 2.009

3.  Influence of edge enhancement applied in endoscopic systems on sharpness and noise.

Authors:  Geert Geleijnse; Bernd Rieger
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2022-10       Impact factor: 3.758

4.  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.

Authors:  Constanze Scholman; Jeroen M Westra; Manon A Zwakenberg; Frederik G Dikkers; Gyorgy B Halmos; Jan Wedman; Jan E Wachters; Bernard F A M van der Laan; Boudewijn E C Plaat
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2019-12-06       Impact factor: 2.597

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.