Title |
The feasibility of NBI in patients with suspected upper airway lesions: A multicenter study
|
---|---|
Published in |
The Laryngoscope, February 2017
|
DOI | 10.1002/lary.26526 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Leif J.J. Bäck, Jami Rekola, Lassi Raittinen, Elina Halme, Petra Pietarinen, Harri Keski‐Säntti, Leena‐Maija Aaltonen, Antti A. Mäkitie, Antti Raappana, Jukka Tikanto, Aleksi Schrey, Reidar Grenman, Jussi Laranne, Petri Koivunen, Heikki Irjala |
Abstract |
Narrow band imaging (NBI) improves diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal cancer, but most reported NBI studies are from experienced centers. Feasibility reports on use at everyday outpatient departments are needed. Researcher-initiated, prospective, multicenter. Participating physicians were instructed in NBI technique during a 4-hour meeting. Patients underwent an examination that included endoscopy with white light (WL) high-definition (HD) TV and NBI filter in the selected time period. All suspicious lesions were biopsied. The medical records of patients with NBI negative findings were evaluated 6 months after the visit to detect all possible malignant lesions coming into view at mucosal sites. These were considered as false-negative cases, enabling long-term assess to the positive predictive value (NPV) of the protocol. We enrolled 125 patients. Of those, 84 (67.2%) were males and the median age was 65 years (range, 35-91). In analysis of the accuracy of WL HD TV and NBI against biopsy, the sensitivity and specificity of WL HD TV were 62% and 81%, respectively; and the sensitivity and specificity of NBI were 100% and 84%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of NBI was significantly better (P < 0.05). When analyzing medical records 6 months after the initial examination, we found three patients who had been diagnosed with a malignant lesion (NPV of NBI of 96.8%). Narrow band imaging is readily implemented in an everyday outpatient practice, and there seems to be better detection rates of dysplastic/carcinoma lesions with HD NBI compared to HD WL. 2b. Laryngoscope, 2017. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Finland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Other | 3 | 14% |
Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
Researcher | 2 | 10% |
Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
Other | 2 | 10% |
Unknown | 8 | 38% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 38% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
Psychology | 1 | 5% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 9 | 43% |