OBJECTIVES: To improve visualization of suspicious lesions of the oral mucosa and to assess the accuracy of Velscope in assessing cellular changes occurring in oral premalignancy for early diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective, randomized in-vivo clinical study a total of 250 patients who gave history of chewing tobacco were screened. The selection of the site of biopsy was taken based on the area of loss of fluorescence identified by the Velscope within the lesion. Routine blood investigations were done. A biopsy was performed to confirm the findings of clinical examination. The data was collected and analysed. RESULTS: Among 200 patients only 110 underwent incisional biopsy. Of these only 89 patients showed neoplastic changes. Of the control biopsies, none of them showed any dysplastic changes. Out of 106 who exhibited speckling under autofluorescence, only 89 showed dysplastic changes whereas only 17 showed no dysplastic changes. Out of these 17 specimens, the histopathological diagnosis of 5 was coated tongue, 3 were pigmented lesions, 3 were geographic tongue and 2 were mucositis. Of the remaining 4, the histopathological diagnosis of 1 was oral submucous fibrosis, 1 was lichen planus and 2 were frictional keratosis. CONCLUSION: False positive findings are possible in presence of highly inflamed tissues, and it is possible that use of Velscope alone may result in failure to detect regions of dysplasia, but it has its use definitely to improve clinical decision making about the nature of oral lesions and aids in decisions to biopsy regions of concern. Use of the scope has allowed practitioners to identify the best region for biopsy. It is much better to occasionally sample tissue that turns out to be benign than to fail to diagnose dysplastic or malignant lesions. However, poor specificity is a major limitation for using it as a screening tool.
OBJECTIVES: To improve visualization of suspicious lesions of the oral mucosa and to assess the accuracy of Velscope in assessing cellular changes occurring in oral premalignancy for early diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective, randomized in-vivo clinical study a total of 250 patients who gave history of chewing tobacco were screened. The selection of the site of biopsy was taken based on the area of loss of fluorescence identified by the Velscope within the lesion. Routine blood investigations were done. A biopsy was performed to confirm the findings of clinical examination. The data was collected and analysed. RESULTS: Among 200 patients only 110 underwent incisional biopsy. Of these only 89 patients showed neoplastic changes. Of the control biopsies, none of them showed any dysplastic changes. Out of 106 who exhibited speckling under autofluorescence, only 89 showed dysplastic changes whereas only 17 showed no dysplastic changes. Out of these 17 specimens, the histopathological diagnosis of 5 was coated tongue, 3 were pigmented lesions, 3 were geographic tongue and 2 were mucositis. Of the remaining 4, the histopathological diagnosis of 1 was oral submucous fibrosis, 1 was lichen planus and 2 were frictional keratosis. CONCLUSION: False positive findings are possible in presence of highly inflamed tissues, and it is possible that use of Velscope alone may result in failure to detect regions of dysplasia, but it has its use definitely to improve clinical decision making about the nature of oral lesions and aids in decisions to biopsy regions of concern. Use of the scope has allowed practitioners to identify the best region for biopsy. It is much better to occasionally sample tissue that turns out to be benign than to fail to diagnose dysplastic or malignant lesions. However, poor specificity is a major limitation for using it as a screening tool.
Authors: J H Takano; T Yakushiji; I Kamiyama; T Nomura; A Katakura; N Takano; T Shibahara Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2010-02-24 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Mark C Pierce; Richard A Schwarz; Vijayashree S Bhattar; Sharon Mondrik; Michelle D Williams; J Jack Lee; Rebecca Richards-Kortum; Ann M Gillenwater Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2012-05-02
Authors: Felix Peter Koch; Peer W Kaemmerer; Stefan Biesterfeld; Martin Kunkel; Wilfried Wagner Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2010-08-17 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Darren Roblyer; Cristina Kurachi; Vanda Stepanek; Michelle D Williams; Adel K El-Naggar; J Jack Lee; Ann M Gillenwater; Rebecca Richards-Kortum Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2009-04-28
Authors: Vijayvel Jayaprakash; Maureen Sullivan; Mihai Merzianu; Nestor R Rigual; Thom R Loree; Saurin R Popat; Kirsten B Moysich; Soumya Ramananda; Timothy Johnson; James R Marshall; Alan D Hutson; Thomas S Mang; Brian C Wilson; Steven R Gill; Jennifer Frustino; Arjen Bogaards; Mary E Reid Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2009-11
Authors: Ina Pavlova; Michelle Williams; Adel El-Naggar; Rebecca Richards-Kortum; Ann Gillenwater Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531