Narrow band imaging and white light endoscopy in the characterization of a polypectomy scar: A single-blind observational study

AIM: To assess the incremental benefit of narrow band imaging (NBI) and white light endoscopy (WLE), randomizing the initial technique for the detection of residual neoplasia at the polypectomy scar after an endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR). METHODS: We conducted an observational study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Riu Pons, Fausto, Andreu García, Montserrat, Gimeno Beltran, Javier, Álvarez-González, Marco Antonio, Seoane, Agustín, Dedeu Cusco, Josep Maria, Barranco Priego, Luis Eugenio, Bessa i Caserras, Xavier
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2018
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10230/42124
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/42124
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v24.i45.5179
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Colonoscopy
Endoscopic mucosal resection
Narrow band imaging
Descripción
Sumario:AIM: To assess the incremental benefit of narrow band imaging (NBI) and white light endoscopy (WLE), randomizing the initial technique for the detection of residual neoplasia at the polypectomy scar after an endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR). METHODS: We conducted an observational study in an academic center to assess the incremental benefit of NBI and WLE randomly applied 1:1 (NBI-WLE or WLE-NBI) in the follow-up of a post-EPMR scar by the same endoscopist. RESULTS: A total of 112 EPMR scars were included. The median baseline polyp size was 20 mm (interquartile range: 14-30). At first review, NBI and WLE showed good sensitivity (85.0% vs 78.9%), specificity (77.1% vs 84.2%) and overall accuracy (80.0% vs 82.5%). NBI after WLE (WLE-NBI group) improved accuracy, but this difference was not statistically significant [area under the curve (AUC): 86.8% vs 81.6%, P = 0.15]. WLE after NBI (NBI-WLE group) did not improve accuracy (AUC: 81.4% vs 81.1%, P = 0.9). Overall, recurrence was found in 39/112 (34.8%) lesions. CONCLUSION: Although no statistically significant differences were found between the two techniques at the first post-EPMR assessment, the use of NBI after WLE may improve residual neoplasia detection. Nevertheless, biopsy is still required in the first scar review.