| Literature DB >> 31186767 |
Zhenhua Su1, Liang Wang2, Sichen Wei1, Xinliang Wei1, Yu Kong1, Weiwei Wang1, Ruixue Guo1, Xiaomeng Shi1.
Abstract
Clinical diagnostic value of digestive endoscopic narrow-band imaging in early esophageal cancer (EC) and benign lesions was explored. Retrospective analysis was carried out on the clinical data of 186 patients with early EC and benign lesions diagnosed by the Department of Gastroenterology in Cangzhou Central Hospital from February 2011 to April 2018. Among them, 102 patients examined by Narrow Band Imaging (NBI) were regarded as the research group. Eighty-four patients examined by conventional white light staining endoscopy were regarded as the control group. The lesion boundary definition, image clarity, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic compliance rate, detection rate of lesions and adverse reactions were compared between the groups after examination. The results showed that the lesion boundary definition in the research group was higher than that in the control group (P<0.05). The 4-points of image clarity in the research group was higher than that in the control group (P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic compliance rate of the early EC and benign lesions in the research group were higher than those in the control group (P<0.05). The detection rate of the upper, middle and lower segments of lesions in the research group was higher than that in the control group. In conclusion, NBI has higher sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic compliance rate for the diagnosis of early EC and benign lesions. Also it has more accuracy in the detection of lesions and fewer adverse reactions, the screening of early EC and benign lesions is effective, and worth promoting clinically.Entities:
Keywords: conventional white light staining endoscopy; diagnostic value; early esophageal cancer; narrow-band imaging technique
Year: 2019 PMID: 31186767 PMCID: PMC6507488 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.10278
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Comparison of general baseline data between the research group and the control group [n (%)] (mean ± SD).
| Types | Research group (n=102) | Control group (n=84) | χ2/T | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 50.23±15.93 | 52.31±16.73 | 0.866 | 0.387 |
| Sex | 0.065 | 0.879 | ||
| Male | 65 (63.73) | 52 (61.90) | ||
| Female | 37 (36.27) | 32 (38.10) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.060 | 0.850 | ||
| <24 | 84 (82.35) | 68 (80.95) | ||
| ≥24 | 18 (17.65) | 16 (19.05) | ||
| Heart rate (times/min) | 0.941 | 0.411 | ||
| <60 | 13 (12.75) | 15 (17.86) | ||
| ≥60 | 89 (87.25) | 69 (82.14) | ||
| Smoking status | 0.125 | 0.762 | ||
| Smoking | 63 (61.76) | 54 (64.29) | ||
| Non-smoking | 39 (38.24) | 30 (35.71) | ||
| Fasting blood sugar (mmol/l) | 4.81±0.72 | 4.68±0.58 | 1.336 | 0.183 |
| Hb (g/l) | 121.48±17.27 | 125.93±14.71 | 1.868 | 0.063 |
| RBC (×1012/l) | 4.48±0.46 | 4.53±0.41 | 0.775 | 0.440 |
| PLT (×109/l) | 224.82±56.16 | 226.35±54.26 | 0.188 | 0.851 |
| Alcoholism | 0.033 | 0.883 | ||
| Alcoholic | 56 (54.90) | 45 (53.57) | ||
| Non-alcoholic | 46 (45.10) | 39 (46.43) |
Figure 1.Comparison of lesion boundary between the research group and the control group. The lesion boundary definition in the research group was 90.20% and was 75.0% in the control group. The lesion boundary definition in the research group was higher than that in the control group (t=7.659, P<0.01). *P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference compared with the control group.
Comparison of the image clarity between the research group and the control group.
| Types | 1 point | 2 points | 3 points | 4 points | Z | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The research group (n=102) | 2 (1.96) | 6 (5.88) | 20 (19.61) | 74 (72.55) | −4.303 | <0.001 |
| The control group (n=84) | 8 (9.52) | 13 (15.48) | 27 (32.14) | 36 (42.86) |
Figure 2.Comparison of the detection of lesions between the research group and the control group. The NBI test results in the research group were 90.48% in the upper segment, 89.36% in the middle segment, and 91.18% in the lower segment. The results of white light staining endoscopy in the control group were 70.59% in the upper segment, 74.36% in the middle segment, and 78.57% in the lower segment. The detection rate in the area of upper, middle and lower lesions of the research group was higher than that in the control group (*P<0.05).
Comparison of detection of early EC and precancerous lesions between the research group and the control group [n (%)].
| Pathological diagnosis | Diagnostic result (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | Sensitivity | Negative predictiveSpecificity | Positive predictive value | Diagnostic value | compliance rate | |
| The research group (n=102) | 91.57 | 84.21 | 96.20 | 69.57 | 90.20 | ||
| Positive | 76 | 3 | |||||
| Negative | 7 | 16 | |||||
| The control group (n=84) | 69.23 | 26.32 | 76.27 | 20.00 | 59.52 | ||
| Positive | 45 | 14 | |||||
| Negative | 20 | 5 | |||||
| χ2 test | 12.193 | 12.880 | 12.422 | 11.959 | 23.996 | ||
| P-value | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | ||
Figure 3.Comparison of adverse reactions between the research group and the control group. The adverse reaction rates in the research group was 8.82% and was 21.43% in the control group. The adverse reaction rates in the research group was better than that in the control group. The difference between two groups was statistically significant (t=5.898, P=0.021). *P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference compared to the control group.