| Title |
Comparative study of the endoscope-based bevelled and volume fiber-optic Raman probes for optical diagnosis of gastric dysplasia in vivo at endoscopy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00216-015-8727-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jianfeng Wang, Kan Lin, Wei Zheng, Khek Yu Ho, Ming Teh, Khay Guan Yeoh, Zhiwei Huang |
| Abstract |
This study aims to compare the diagnostic performance of the two different endoscope-based fiber-optic Raman probe designs (i.e., bevelled and volume Raman probes) for real-time, in vivo detection of gastric dysplasia at endoscopy. To conduct the clinical comparison, a total of 1,050 in vivo tissue Raman spectra (normal: n = 864; dysplasia: n = 186) were acquired from 66 gastric patients (normal: n = 48; dysplasia: n = 18) by using bevelled Raman probe, while a total of 1,913 in vivo tissue Raman spectra (normal: n = 1,786; dysplasia: n = 127) were acquired from 98 gastric patients (normal: n = 87; dysplasia: n = 11) by using volume Raman probe. The bevelled Raman probe provides approximately twofold improvements in tissue Raman-to-autofluorescence intensity ratios as compared to the use of volume Raman probe. Partial least squares discriminant analysis together with leave-one patient-out cross-validation on in vivo tissue Raman spectra acquired yields a diagnostic accuracy of 93.0 % (sensitivity of 92.5 %; specificity of 93.1 %) for differentiating gastric dysplasia from normal gastric tissue by using the bevelled fiber-optic Raman probe, which is superior to the diagnostic performance (accuracy of 88.4 %; sensitivity of 85.8 %; specificity of 88.6 %) by using the volume Raman probe. This work demonstrates that the Raman spectroscopic technique coupled with bevelled fiber-optic Raman probe has great potential to enhance in vivo diagnosis of gastric precancer and early cancer at endoscopy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 11 | 26% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 8 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#7,541
of 9,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,393
of 279,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#86
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,618 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.