| Literature DB >> 35155488 |
Duc Trong Quach1,2, Rika Aoki3, Akiko Iga4, Quang Dinh Le1,2, Toru Kawamura5, Ken Yamashita6, Shinji Tanaka6, Masaharu Yoshihara7, Toru Hiyama7.
Abstract
AIM: To assess the time trend of diagnostic accuracy of pre- and post-eradication H. pylori status and interobserver agreement of gastric atrophy grading.Entities:
Keywords: Helicobacter pylori; Kimura-Takemoto classification; Kyoto classification; endoscopic diagnosis; gastric atrophy; interobserver agreement
Year: 2022 PMID: 35155488 PMCID: PMC8831333 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.830730
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
Figure 1Important endoscopic findings and pitfalls in the correct diagnosis of H. pylori status. (a) Diffuse redness, typically seen in patients with current H. pylori infection, should be differentiated from patchy redness (b), which can be seen in patients with past infection. (c) Mucosal edema is a typical finding commonly seen in current H. pylori infection that disappears in patients with past infection (d). The regular arrangement of collecting venules (e), which is a typical finding in the stomach of patients never infected with H. pylori, disappears in patients with H. pylori infection but could recur years after eradication (f).
Figure 2Endoscopic accuracy of H. pylori infection diagnosis (infected/never infected) and accuracy for H. pylori infection status (never, current, or past infected).
Figure 3Time trend of diagnostic accuracy for H. pylori status based on white-light endoscopy.
Figure 4Accuracy of the endoscopic diagnosis of H. pylori infection status (never, current, or past infected) using high-quality vs. low-quality image series.
Interobserver agreement of gastric atrophy grading using image series of different quality.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Assessor 1 | - | 0.800 | 0.722 | 0.766 | 0.746 |
| Assessor 2 | 0.800 | - | 0.810 | 0.655 | 0.678 |
| Assessor 3 | 0.722 | 0.810 | - | 0.545 | 0.631 |
| Assessor 4 | 0.766 | 0.655 | 0.545 | - | 0.767 |
| Assessor 5 | 0.746 | 0.678 | 0.631 | 0.767 | - |
|
| |||||
| Assessor 1 | - | 0.829 | 0.769 | 0.768 | 0.762 |
| Assessor 2 | 0.829 | - | 0.869 | 0.675 | 0.728 |
| Assessor 3 | 0.769 | 0.869 | - | 0.563 | 0.641 |
| Assessor 4 | 0.768 | 0.675 | 0.563 | - | 0.785 |
| Assessor 5 | 0.762 | 0.728 | 0.641 | 0.785 | - |
|
| |||||
| Assessor 1 | - | 0.646 | 0.511 | 0.734 | 0.678 |
| Assessor 2 | 0.646 | - | 0.555 | 0.517 | 0.459 |
| Assessor 3 | 0.511 | 0.555 | - | 0.446 | 0.571 |
| Assessor 4 | 0.734 | 0.517 | 0.446 | - | 0.692 |
| Assessor 5 | 0.678 | 0.459 | 0.571 | 0.692 | - |
Figure 5Causes of low-quality images used for the endoscopic diagnosis of H. pylori status (A) and for gastric atrophy grading (B).
Figure 6Examples of low-quality endoscopic images. (a) Insufficient air insufflation (image obtained in a patient at 4 years after eradication). (b) Improper light (too dark) (image obtained in a patient with current H. pylori infection). (c) Improper light (too bright) (image obtained in a patient with current H. pylori infection). (d) Blurred image (image obtained in a patient with current H. pylori infection). (e) Some mucus is still retained in the stomach (image obtained in a patient at 5 years after eradication). (f) Poor color tone (image obtained in a patient at 1 year after eradication).