These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Optical Technologies for Endoscopic Real-Time Histologic Assessment of Colorectal Polyps: A Meta-Analysis.
    Author: Mason SE, Poynter L, Takats Z, Darzi A, Kinross JM.
    Journal: Am J Gastroenterol; 2019 Aug; 114(8):1219-1230. PubMed ID: 30848728.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: Accurate, real-time, endoscopic risk stratification of colorectal polyps would improve decision-making and optimize clinical efficiency. Technologies to manipulate endoscopic optical outputs can be used to predict polyp histology in vivo; however, it remains unclear how accuracy has progressed and whether it is sufficient for routine clinical implementation. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies were included if they prospectively deployed an endoscopic optical technology for real-time in vivo prediction of adenomatous colorectal polyps. Polyposis and inflammatory bowel diseases were excluded. Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis was performed, presenting 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: One hundred two studies using optical technologies on 33,123 colorectal polyps were included. Digital chromoendoscopy differentiated neoplasia (adenoma and adenocarcinoma) from benign polyps with sensitivity of 92.2% (90.6%-93.9% CI) and specificity of 84.0% (81.5%-86.3% CI), with no difference between constituent technologies (narrow-band imaging, Fuji intelligent Chromo Endoscopy, iSCAN) or with only diminutive polyps. Dye chromoendoscopy had sensitivity of 92.7% (90.1%-94.9% CI) and specificity of 86.6% (82.9%-89.9% CI), similarly unchanged for diminutive polyps. Spectral analysis of autofluorescence had sensitivity of 94.4% (84.0%-99.1% CI) and specificity of 50.9% (13.2%-88.8% CI). Endomicroscopy had sensitivity of 93.6% (85.3%-98.3% CI) and specificity of 92.5% (81.8%-98.1% CI). Computer-aided diagnosis had sensitivity of 88.9% (74.2%-96.7% CI) and specificity of 80.4% (52.6%-95.7% CI). Prediction confidence and endoscopist experience alone did not significantly improve any technology. The only subgroup to demonstrate a negative predictive value for adenoma above 90% was digital chromoendoscopy, making high confidence predictions of diminutive recto-sigmoid polyps. Chronologic meta-analyses show a falling negative predictive value over time. A significant publication bias exists. DISCUSSION: This novel approach to meta-analysis demonstrates that existing optical technologies are increasingly unlikely to allow safe "resect and discard" strategies and that step-change innovation may be required. A "diagnose and leave" strategy may be supported for diminutive recto-sigmoid polyps diagnosed with high confidence; however, limitations exist in the evidence base for this cohort.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]