Diagnostic accuracy of linked color imaging and white light imaging for early gastric cancer and gastrointestinal metaplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
메타분석
1/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
7836 patients were included in the meta-analysis.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
[CONCLUSIONS] The detection efficiency of LCI for EGC and GIM is better than that of WLI, and LCI is recommended as the main screening method for EGC and GIM. [SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION] https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023452140.
[BACKGROUND] Conventional white light imaging (WLI) frequently misses gastric cancer, resulting in a high rate of undiagnosed cases.
- p-value p=0.004
- p-value p=0.0003
- 95% CI 2.33-9.82
- Sensitivity 87%
- Specificity 82%
- 연구 설계 meta-analysis
APA
Duan H, Zhou X, et al. (2024). Diagnostic accuracy of linked color imaging and white light imaging for early gastric cancer and gastrointestinal metaplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Frontiers in oncology, 14, 1480651. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1480651
MLA
Duan H, et al.. "Diagnostic accuracy of linked color imaging and white light imaging for early gastric cancer and gastrointestinal metaplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.." Frontiers in oncology, vol. 14, 2024, pp. 1480651.
PMID
39619434
Abstract
[BACKGROUND] Conventional white light imaging (WLI) frequently misses gastric cancer, resulting in a high rate of undiagnosed cases. This study compares the effectiveness of linked color imaging (LCI) and WLI in detecting early gastric cancer and gastrointestinal metaplasia, aiming to improve clinical diagnostic practices through evidence-based medical insights.
[METHODS] The QUADAS-2 tool evaluated the quality of the studies. Additionally, methods like Split Component Synthesis (SCS) were utilized to evaluate the diagnostic performance of LCI and WLI.
[RESULTS] Eleven studies involving a total of 7836 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Comparative analysis revealed that LCI demonstrated a statistically significant superiority over WLI in terms of the detection rates of EGC and GIM (detection rate of EGC: LCI vs WLI, 85% vs. 56.7%, p=0.004, OR 4.78, 95% CI 2.33-9.82, I2 = 71%; detection rate of GIM: LCI vs WLI, 88.9% vs. 40.1%, p=0.0003, OR 9.94, 95% CI 5.59-17.68, I2 = 71%). Additionally, LCI exhibited better sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of EGC and GIM compared to WLI. For the entire cohort, the sensitivity of LCI for EGC detection was 80% (95% CI 71%-86%) with a specificity of 82% (95% CI 63%-92%), while for GIM detection, the sensitivity was 87% (95% CI 81%-92%) with a specificity of 85% (95% CI 77%-91%).
[CONCLUSIONS] The detection efficiency of LCI for EGC and GIM is better than that of WLI, and LCI is recommended as the main screening method for EGC and GIM.
[SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION] https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023452140.
[METHODS] The QUADAS-2 tool evaluated the quality of the studies. Additionally, methods like Split Component Synthesis (SCS) were utilized to evaluate the diagnostic performance of LCI and WLI.
[RESULTS] Eleven studies involving a total of 7836 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Comparative analysis revealed that LCI demonstrated a statistically significant superiority over WLI in terms of the detection rates of EGC and GIM (detection rate of EGC: LCI vs WLI, 85% vs. 56.7%, p=0.004, OR 4.78, 95% CI 2.33-9.82, I2 = 71%; detection rate of GIM: LCI vs WLI, 88.9% vs. 40.1%, p=0.0003, OR 9.94, 95% CI 5.59-17.68, I2 = 71%). Additionally, LCI exhibited better sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of EGC and GIM compared to WLI. For the entire cohort, the sensitivity of LCI for EGC detection was 80% (95% CI 71%-86%) with a specificity of 82% (95% CI 63%-92%), while for GIM detection, the sensitivity was 87% (95% CI 81%-92%) with a specificity of 85% (95% CI 77%-91%).
[CONCLUSIONS] The detection efficiency of LCI for EGC and GIM is better than that of WLI, and LCI is recommended as the main screening method for EGC and GIM.
[SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION] https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023452140.
같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)
- Risk of Malignancies and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Related to JAK Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Meta-Analysis.
- Aronia Berry Extract Inhibits Cancer Stemness and Overcomes 5-Fluorouracil Resistance by Targeting TLR3/NF-κB Signaling in Colorectal Cancer.
- Micronuclei: origins, assays, mechanisms, diseases and treatments.
- Prognostic Model Construction of Disulfidptosis-Related Genes and Targeted Anticancer Drug Research in Pancreatic Cancer.
- Exosomal non-coding RNAs: orchestrators of intercellular crosstalk in the prostate cancer tumor microenvironment.