D. Kikuchi, H. Odagiri, Y. Hoshihara, Y. Ochiai, Yugo Suzuki, J. Hayasaka, Masami Tanaka, K. Nomura, S. Yamashita, A. Matsui, T. Iizuka, S. Hoteya
{"title":"窄带放大内镜时代粘膜破裂的定义","authors":"D. Kikuchi, H. Odagiri, Y. Hoshihara, Y. Ochiai, Yugo Suzuki, J. Hayasaka, Masami Tanaka, K. Nomura, S. Yamashita, A. Matsui, T. Iizuka, S. Hoteya","doi":"10.1155/2022/3952962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Gastroesophageal reflux disease is diagnosed endoscopically based on the presence of mucosal breaks. However, mucosal breaks can be judged differently depending on the endoscopist, even in the same image. We investigated how narrow-band imaging (NBI) and magnified endoscopy affect the judgment of mucosal breaks. Methods A total of 43 consecutive patients were enrolled who had suspected mucosal breaks on white-light images (WLI) and underwent nonmagnified NBI (N-NBI) and magnified NBI (M-NBI) by a single endoscopist. From WLI, N-NBI, and M-NBI, 129 image files were created. Eight endoscopists reviewed the image files and judged the presence of mucosal breaks. Results The 8 endoscopists determined mucosal breaks were present in 79.4 ± 9.5% (67.4%–93.0%) on WLI, and 76.7 ± 12.7% (53.5%–90.7%) on N-NBI. However, the percentage of mucosal breaks on M-NBI was significantly lower at 48.8 ± 17.0% (18.6%–65.1%) (p < 0.05). Intraclass correlation between observers was 0.864 (95% CI 0.793–0.918) for WLI and 0.863 (95% CI 0.791–0.917) for N-NBI but was lower for M-NBI at 0.758 (95% CI 0.631–0.854). Conclusion Rates of detection and agreement for mucosal breaks on WLI and N-NBI were high among endoscopists. However, these rates were lower on M-NBI.","PeriodicalId":12597,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Definition of Mucosal Breaks in the Era of Magnifying Endoscopy with Narrow-Band Imaging\",\"authors\":\"D. Kikuchi, H. Odagiri, Y. Hoshihara, Y. Ochiai, Yugo Suzuki, J. Hayasaka, Masami Tanaka, K. Nomura, S. Yamashita, A. Matsui, T. Iizuka, S. Hoteya\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2022/3952962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Gastroesophageal reflux disease is diagnosed endoscopically based on the presence of mucosal breaks. However, mucosal breaks can be judged differently depending on the endoscopist, even in the same image. We investigated how narrow-band imaging (NBI) and magnified endoscopy affect the judgment of mucosal breaks. Methods A total of 43 consecutive patients were enrolled who had suspected mucosal breaks on white-light images (WLI) and underwent nonmagnified NBI (N-NBI) and magnified NBI (M-NBI) by a single endoscopist. From WLI, N-NBI, and M-NBI, 129 image files were created. Eight endoscopists reviewed the image files and judged the presence of mucosal breaks. Results The 8 endoscopists determined mucosal breaks were present in 79.4 ± 9.5% (67.4%–93.0%) on WLI, and 76.7 ± 12.7% (53.5%–90.7%) on N-NBI. However, the percentage of mucosal breaks on M-NBI was significantly lower at 48.8 ± 17.0% (18.6%–65.1%) (p < 0.05). Intraclass correlation between observers was 0.864 (95% CI 0.793–0.918) for WLI and 0.863 (95% CI 0.791–0.917) for N-NBI but was lower for M-NBI at 0.758 (95% CI 0.631–0.854). Conclusion Rates of detection and agreement for mucosal breaks on WLI and N-NBI were high among endoscopists. However, these rates were lower on M-NBI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastroenterology Research and Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastroenterology Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3952962\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3952962","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Definition of Mucosal Breaks in the Era of Magnifying Endoscopy with Narrow-Band Imaging
Background Gastroesophageal reflux disease is diagnosed endoscopically based on the presence of mucosal breaks. However, mucosal breaks can be judged differently depending on the endoscopist, even in the same image. We investigated how narrow-band imaging (NBI) and magnified endoscopy affect the judgment of mucosal breaks. Methods A total of 43 consecutive patients were enrolled who had suspected mucosal breaks on white-light images (WLI) and underwent nonmagnified NBI (N-NBI) and magnified NBI (M-NBI) by a single endoscopist. From WLI, N-NBI, and M-NBI, 129 image files were created. Eight endoscopists reviewed the image files and judged the presence of mucosal breaks. Results The 8 endoscopists determined mucosal breaks were present in 79.4 ± 9.5% (67.4%–93.0%) on WLI, and 76.7 ± 12.7% (53.5%–90.7%) on N-NBI. However, the percentage of mucosal breaks on M-NBI was significantly lower at 48.8 ± 17.0% (18.6%–65.1%) (p < 0.05). Intraclass correlation between observers was 0.864 (95% CI 0.793–0.918) for WLI and 0.863 (95% CI 0.791–0.917) for N-NBI but was lower for M-NBI at 0.758 (95% CI 0.631–0.854). Conclusion Rates of detection and agreement for mucosal breaks on WLI and N-NBI were high among endoscopists. However, these rates were lower on M-NBI.
期刊介绍:
Gastroenterology Research and Practice is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal which publishes original research articles, review articles and clinical studies based on all areas of gastroenterology, hepatology, pancreas and biliary, and related cancers. The journal welcomes submissions on the physiology, pathophysiology, etiology, diagnosis and therapy of gastrointestinal diseases. The aim of the journal is to provide cutting edge research related to the field of gastroenterology, as well as digestive diseases and disorders.
Topics of interest include:
Management of pancreatic diseases
Third space endoscopy
Endoscopic resection
Therapeutic endoscopy
Therapeutic endosonography.