Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Ability of detection in different resolution endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal mucosal lesions
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Ability of detection in different resolution endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal mucosal lesions
Do you wish to request the book?
Ability of detection in different resolution endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal mucosal lesions
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Ability of detection in different resolution endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal mucosal lesions
2024
Overview
BackgroundMost endoscopists believe that higher resolution improves lesion detection rates. However, existing studies primarily compared the detection rates of white light endoscopy (WLE) and other imaging modalities. Our previous study demonstrated the advantages of magnifying endoscopy from general endoscopy for lesion detection, prompting further investigation into the variations in lesion detection rates across endoscopes with different resolutions.MethodsEndoscopic and corresponding pathological data from our medical unit over the past 5 years were analyzed. We excluded specific-purpose endoscopic procedures to ensure the natural randomization of the data. Baseline adjustment and risk factor analyses used multi-group propensity score matching and logistic regression.ResultsThe overall lesion detection rate was significantly higher with high-quality endoscopy (Q-endoscopy) compared to high-definition endoscopy (H-endoscopy) and high definition and quality endoscopy (HQ-endoscopy) (34.4% vs. 30.2% vs. 29.6%, P = 0.001). Similar results were observed for elevated lesions (25.7% vs. 21.0% vs. 22.9%, P = 0.001) and depressed lesions (6.6% vs. 6.2% vs. 3.6%, P < 0.001). HQ-endoscopy had a superior detection rate for superficial lesions compared to both H- and Q-endoscopies (3.0% vs. 2.8% vs. 1.8%, P = 0.041). However, there were no significant differences in neoplastic detection rate or missed neoplastic lesion rate among the three groups.ConclusionQ-endoscopy is superior in detecting non-superficial lesions, while HQ-endoscopy is better at detecting superficial lesions. However, there were no statistically significant differences in detecting or omitting neoplastic lesions among the three endoscopic examinations.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.