| Literature DB >> 29890991 |
Katayoun Taghavi1, Dipanwita Banerjee2, Ranajit Mandal2, Helena Kopp Kallner3, Malin Thorsell3, Therese Friis4, Ljiljana Kocoska-Maras5, Björn Strander6, Albert Singer7, Elisabeth Wikström3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional pilot study evaluates diagnostic accuracy of live colposcopy versus static image Swede-score evaluation for detecting significant precancerous cervical lesions greater than, or equal to grade 2 severity (CIN2+).Entities:
Keywords: Cervical screening; Colposcopy telemedicine; Gynocular; Low-resource settings; Mobile colposcope
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29890991 PMCID: PMC6040214 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-018-0569-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Womens Health ISSN: 1472-6874 Impact factor: 2.809
Swede score and description of scoring [17]
| Score | 0 | 1 | 2 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acetowhite uptake | Nil or transparent | Shady, milky (not transparent not opaque) | Distinct, opague white | |
| Margins surface | Diffuse | Sharp but Irregular, jagged, “geographical” satellites | Sharp and even, difference in surface level such as “cuffing” | |
| Vessels | Fine, regular | Absent | Coarse or atypical | |
| Lesion size | < 5 mm | 5–15 or or 2 quadrants | > 15mm or spanning 3–4 quadrants or endocervically undefined | |
| Iodine staining | Brown | Faintly or patchy yellow | Distinct yellow | |
| Total | /10 |
Julie Bowring, Bjorn Strander, Martin Young, Heather Evans, Patrick Walker, The Swede Score: Evaluation of a Scoring System Designed to Improve the Predictive Value of Colposcopy, Table 1, Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease, vol 14, issue 4, pages 301–305
https://journals.lww.com/jlgtd/Abstract/2010/10000/The_Swede_Score__Evaluation_of_a_Scoring_System.5.aspx promotional and commercial use of the material in print, digital or mobile device format is prohibited without the permission from the publisher Wolters Kluwer. Please contact permissions@lww.com for further information. License to reprint Swede Score Model is included as an additional document to this paper (Additional file 1)
Fig. 1Colposcopy telemedicine equipment. From left to right - Gynocular device, telemedicine smartphone based patient record system, clinical examination and Swede score tool. Below - images obtained from the unit
Baseline findings
| VIA+ HPV+ | VIA+ HPV- | VIA- HPV+ | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (sd) | 33.6 (2.9) | 35.3 (5.9) | 41.5 (7.9) | 36.8 (6.9) |
| Biopsy (%) | ||||
| Benign | 4 (40.0) | 37 (63.8) | 21 (80.8) | 62 (66.0) |
| CIN1 | 2 (20.0) | 13 (22.4) | 4 (15.4) | 19 (20.2) |
| CIN2 | 2 (20.0) | 5 (8.6) | 1 (3.8) | 8 (8.5) |
| CIN3 | 1 (10.0) | 3 (5.2) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (4.3) |
| ICC | 1 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.1) |
Legend: sd standard deviation, % percentage, VIA+ positive for visual inspection with acetic acid, VIA negative for visual inspection with acetic acid, HPV+ positive test for human papillomavirus, HPV negative test for human papillomavirus, CIN1,2,3 Cervical intra-epithelial neoplastic lesions grade 1,2,3, ICC invasive cervical cancer
Sensitivity and specificity in detecting CIN2+ for Live and Static examinations
| Swede Score | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Live (95% CI) | Live (95% CI) | Live (95% CI) | Live (95% CI) | |
| Static (95% CI) | Static (95% CI) | Static (95% CI) | Static (95% CI) | |
|
| 0.0% (0.0–24.7%) | 98.8% (93.3–100.0%) | 86.0% (77.3–92.3%) | 0.0% (0.0–97.5%) |
| 0.0% (0.0–24.7%) | 100.0% (95.5–100.0%) | 86.2% (77.5–92.4%) | NaN% (0.0–100.0%) | |
|
| 15.4% (1.9–45.4%) | 98.8% (93.3–100.0%) | 87.9% (79.4–93.8%) | 66.7% (9.4–99.2%) |
| 0.0% (0.0–24.7%) | 100.0% (95.5–100.0%) | 86.2% (77.5–92.4%) | NaN% (0.0–100.0%) | |
|
| 30.8% (9.1–61.4%) | 97.5% (91.4–99.7%) | 89.8% (81.5–95.2%) | 66.7% (22.3–95.7%) |
| 15.4% (1.9–45.4%) | 95.1% (87.8–98.6%) | 87.5% (78.7–93.6%) | 33.3% (4.3–77.7%) | |
|
| 46.2% (19.2–74.9%) | 88.9% (80.0–94.8%) | 91.1% (82.6–96.4%) | 40.0% (16.3–67.7%) |
| 53.8% (25.1–80.8%) | 87.7% (78.5–93.9%) | 92.2% (83.8–97.1%) | 41.2% (18.4–67.1%) | |
|
| 53.8% (25.1–80.8%) | 77.8% (67.2–86.3%) | 91.3% (82.0–96.7%) | 28.0% (12.1–49.4%) |
| 69.2% (38.6–90.9%) | 67.9% (56.6–77.8%) | 93.2% (83.5–98.1%) | 25.7% (12.5–43.3%) | |
|
| 76.9% (46.2–95.0%) | 39.5% (28.8–51.0%) | 91.4% (76.9–98.2%) | 16.9% (8.4–29.0%) |
| 76.9% (46.2–95.0%) | 45.7% (34.6–57.1%) | 92.5% (79.6–98.4%) | 18.5% (9.3–31.4%) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 76.9% (46.2–95.0%) | 37.0% (26.6–48.5%) | 90.9% (75.7–98.1%) | 16.4% (8.2–28.1%) |
| 84.6% (54.6–98.1%) | 13.6% (7.0–23.0%) | 84.6% (54.6–98.1%) | 13.6% (7.0–23.0%) | |
|
| 76.9% (46.2–95.0%) | 33.3% (23.2–44.7%) | 90.0% (73.5–97.9%) | 15.6% (7.8–26.9%) |
| 92.3% (64.0–99.8%) | 8.6% (3.5–17.0%) | 87.5% (47.3–99.7%) | 14.0% (7.4–23.1%) | |
|
| 100.0% (75.3–100.0%) | 2.5% (0.3–8.6%) | 100.0% (15.8–100.0%) | 14.1% (7.7–23.0%) |
| 92.3% (64.0–99.8%) | 2.5% (0.3–8.6%) | 66.7% (9.4–99.2%) | 13.2% (7.0–21.9%) |
Legend: CI confidence intervals
Fig. 2ROC curve and accuracy in detecting CIN2+ by Swede Score for live and static colposcopists. Bold line = test accuracy of each swede score when live assessment made, Dashed line = test accuracy at each swede score when using static images (average of all assessors). Lighter lines show the respective 95% confidence intervals. AUC = area under the curve
Fig. 3ROC curve of each colposcopist in detecting CIN2+ by Swede score. Each color depicts the assessment accuracy of one gynecologist, as per the key on the bottom right hand corner of the figure. AUC = area under the curve