首页> 外文OA文献 >Virtual chromoendoscopy for the real-time assessment of colorectal polyps in vivo: a systematic review and economic evaluation
【2h】

Virtual chromoendoscopy for the real-time assessment of colorectal polyps in vivo: a systematic review and economic evaluation

机译:虚拟染色内镜检查用于体内结肠息肉的实时评估:系统评价和经济评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background\udCurrent clinical practice is to remove a colorectal polyp detected during colonoscopy and determine whether it is an adenoma or hyperplastic by histopathology. Identifying adenomas is important because they may eventually become cancerous if untreated, whereas hyperplastic polyps do not usually develop into cancer, and a surveillance interval is set based on the number and size of adenomas found. Virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) (an electronic endoscopic imaging technique) could be used by the endoscopist under strictly controlled conditions for real-time optical diagnosis of diminutive (≤ 5 mm) colorectal polyps to replace histopathological diagnosis.\udObjective\udTo assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the VCE technologies narrow-band imaging (NBI), flexible spectral imaging colour enhancement (FICE) and i-scan for the characterisation and management of diminutive (≤ 5 mm) colorectal polyps using high-definition (HD) systems without magnification.\udDesign\udSystematic review and economic analysis.\udParticipants\udPeople undergoing colonoscopy for screening or surveillance or to investigate symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer.\udInterventions\udNBI, FICE and i-scan.\udMain outcome measures\udDiagnostic accuracy, recommended surveillance intervals, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adverse effects, incidence of colorectal cancer, mortality and cost-effectiveness of VCE compared with histopathology.\udData sources\udElectronic bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for published English-language studies from inception to June 2016. Bibliographies of related papers, systematic reviews and company information were screened and experts were contacted to identify additional evidence.\udReview methods\udSystematic reviews of test accuracy and economic evaluations were undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Meta-analyses were conducted, where possible, to inform the independent economic model. A cost–utility decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of VCE compared with histopathology. The model used a decision tree for patients undergoing endoscopy, combined with estimates of long-term outcomes (e.g. incidence of colorectal cancer and subsequent morbidity and mortality) derived from University of Sheffield School of Health and Related Research’s bowel cancer screening model. The model took a NHS perspective, with costs and benefits discounted at 3.5% over a lifetime horizon. There were limitations in the data on the distribution of adenomas across risk categories and recurrence rates post polypectomy.\udResults\udThirty test accuracy studies were included: 24 for NBI, five for i-scan and three for FICE (two studies assessed two interventions). Polyp assessments made with high confidence were associated with higher sensitivity and endoscopists experienced in VCE achieved better results than those without experience. Two economic evaluations were included. NBI, i-scan and FICE are cost-saving strategies compared with histopathology and the number of quality-adjusted life-years gained was similar for histopathology and VCE. The correct surveillance interval would be given to 95% of patients with NBI, 94% of patients with FICE and 97% of patients with i-scan.\udLimitations\udLimited evidence was available for i-scan and FICE and there was heterogeneity among the NBI studies. There is a lack of data on longer-term health outcomes of patients undergoing VCE for assessment of diminutive colorectal polyps.\udConclusions\udVCE technologies, using HD systems without magnification, could potentially be used for the real-time assessment of diminutive colorectal polyps, if endoscopists have adequate experience and training.\udFuture work\udFuture research priorities include head-to-head randomised controlled trials of all three VCE technologies; more research on the diagnostic accuracy of FICE and i-scan (when used without magnification); further studies evaluating the impact of endoscopist experience and training on outcomes; studies measuring adverse effects, HRQoL and anxiety; and longitudinal data on colorectal cancer incidence, HRQoL and mortality.\udStudy registration\udThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016037767.\udFunding\udThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
机译:背景技术目前的临床实践是去除结肠镜检查中检测到的结肠直肠息肉,并通过组织病理学确定其是腺瘤还是增生。识别腺瘤很重要,因为如果不加以治疗,腺瘤可能最终会癌变,而增生性息肉通常不会发展为癌症,并且根据发现的腺瘤的数量和大小设置监测间隔。内镜医师可在严格控制的条件下使用虚拟色内窥镜检查(VCE)(电子内窥镜成像技术)对微小(≤5mm)结直肠息肉进行实时光学诊断,以代替组织病理学诊断。\ ud客观\ ud评估临床疗效VCE技术的窄带成像(NBI),柔性光谱成像色彩增强(FICE)和i-scan的优势和成本效益,用于使用高清(HD)系统表征和管理微小(≤5mm)结直肠息肉\ udDesign \ ud系统评价和经济分析。\ ud参加者\ ud接受结肠镜检查以筛查或监视或调查提示结直肠癌的症状的人。\ ud干预措施\ udNBI,FICE和i-scan。\ ud主要结局指标\ ud诊断准确性,建议的监测间隔,与健康相关的生活质量(HRQoL),不良反应,结直肠癌的发生率,死亡率和从组织学开始到2016年6月,从MEDLINE,EMBASE,Cochrane图书馆和效应评论摘要数据库等电子书目数据库中检索已发表的英语研究。 \ udReview方法\ ud根据“系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目”对测试准确性和经济评估进行系统评价。进行了荟萃分析,以告知独立的经济模型。建立了成本-效用决策分析模型,以评估VCE与组织病理学相比的成本-效果。该模型将决策树用于接受内窥镜检查的患者,并结合了谢菲尔德大学健康与相关研究学院的肠癌筛查模型得出的长期结局(例如,结直肠癌的发病率以及随后的发病率和死亡率)的估算值。该模型从NHS角度出发,其成本和收益在整个生命周期中均降低了3.5%。息肉切除术后腺瘤在不同风险类别和复发率方面的数据存在局限性。\ ud结果\ ud包括30项测试准确性研究:NBI为24项,i-scan为5项,FICE为3项(两项研究评估了两种干预措施) 。高置信度的息肉评估与更高的敏感性相关,并且在VCE中有经验的内镜医师要比没有经验的内窥镜医师取得更好的结果。包括两项经济评估。与组织病理学相比,NBI,i-scan和FICE是节省成本的策略,对于组织病理学和VCE,获得的质量调整生命年数相似。正确的监测间隔应给予95%的NBI患者,94%的FICE患者和97%的i-scan患者。\ udLimitations \ ud有限的证据适用于i-scan和FICE,并且存在异质性NBI研究。缺乏有关接受VCE评估小肠息肉的患者长期健康结果的数据。\ udConclusions \ udVCE技术,使用未经放大的高清系统,可能会用于实时评估小肠息肉, \ udFuture的工作\ udFuture的研究重点包括所有三种VCE技术的面对面随机对照试验;有关FICE和i扫描的诊断准确性的更多研究(在不放大的情况下使用);进一步评估内镜医师经验和培训对结果的影响的研究;研究测量不良反应,HRQoL和焦虑症; \ ud研究注册\ ud本研究已注册为PROSPERO CRD42016037767。\ udFunding \ ud美国国立卫生研究院健康技术评估计划。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号