Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Using Magnifying and Nonmagnifying Narrow-Band Imaging Endoscopy
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?
Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Using Magnifying and Nonmagnifying Narrow-Band Imaging Endoscopy
Do you wish to request the book?
Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Using Magnifying and Nonmagnifying Narrow-Band Imaging Endoscopy
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
Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Using Magnifying and Nonmagnifying Narrow-Band Imaging Endoscopy
2022
Overview
Several endoscopic findings obtained by magnifying image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) are reportedly correlated with gastric intestinal metaplasia (IM); however, the differences between magnifying and nonmagnifying IEE for the diagnosis of gastric IM remain unknown. This study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent narrow-band imaging endoscopy. Four areas of the stomach were evaluated using nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE. Light-blue crest (LBC), white opaque substance (WOS), and endoscopic grading of the gastric IM (EGGIM) were assessed. The concordance rates between nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE were 80.5% for LBC and 93.3% for WOS. The strength of agreement between each observation technique showed good reproducibility, with a kappa value of 0.69 and 0.83 for LBC and WOS, respectively. The individual EGGIM score indicated a good correlation between nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE (concordance rate, 75%; kappa value, 0.67). The prevalence of a high EGGIM score in patients with and without gastric cancer (GC) showed a significant difference both with nonmagnifying IEE (odds ratio (OR), 3.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2–9.0), and magnifying IEE (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1–8.9). Nonmagnifying IEE has the potential to stratify the individual risk of GC, similar to magnifying IEE, warranting further investigation with histological assessment.
Publisher
MDPI AG,MDPI
