Dataset Information

Comparison of Colposcopic Impression Based on Live Colposcopy and Evaluation of Static Digital Images.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The aim of the study was to evaluate the agreement and compare diagnostic accuracy of colposcopic impressions from live colposcopy versus evaluation of static digital images. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Live impressions and corresponding static images obtained during colposcopy of 690 women were independently compared. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for colposcopic impressions from both methods, varying hypothetical thresholds for colposcopically directed cervical biopsies (acetowhitening or worse, low grade or worse, high grade or worse). Stratified analyses investigated the impact of referral cytology, human papillomavirus 16 infection, and age on colposcopic impression. RESULTS:Overall agreement between live and static colposcopic visualization was 43.0% (? = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.14-0.26) over normal, acetowhitening, low-grade, and high-grade impressions. Classification of acetowhitening or worse impressions showed the highest agreement (92.2%; ? = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.21-0.57); both methods achieved more than 95% sensitivity for CIN 2+. Agreement between live and static colposcopic visualization was 69.3% for rating low-grade or worse impressions (? = 0.23; 95% CI = 0.14-0.33) and 71% when rating high-grade impressions (? = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.24-0.42). Live colposcopic impressions were more likely to be rated low grade or worse (p < .01; odds ratio = 3.5; 95% CI = 2.4-5.0), yielding higher sensitivity for CIN 2+ at this threshold than static image assessment (95.4% vs 79.8%, p < .01). Overall, colposcopic impressions were more likely rated high grade on live assessment among women referred with high-grade cytology (odds ratio = 3.3; 95% CI = 1.8-6.4), significantly improving the sensitivity for CIN 2+ (66.3% vs 48.5%, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS:Colposcopic impressions of acetowhitening or worse are highly sensitive for identifying cervical precancers and reproducible on static image-based pattern recognition.

SUBMITTER: Liu AH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4808516 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Colposcopic Impression Based on Live Colposcopy and Evaluation of Static Digital Images.

Liu Angela H AH Liu Angela H AH Liu Angela H AH Gold Michael A MA Schiffman Mark M Smith Katie M KM Zuna Rosemary E RE Dunn S Terence ST Gage Julia C JC Walker Joan L JL Wentzensen Nicolas N

Journal of lower genital tract disease 20160401 2

<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of the study was to evaluate the agreement and compare diagnostic accuracy of colposcopic impressions from live colposcopy versus evaluation of static digital images.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Live impressions and corresponding static images obtained during colposcopy of 690 women were independently compared. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for colposcopic impressions from both methods, varying hypothetical thresholds for colposcopically directed cervical biopsies ...[more]

PMID: 27015261

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis cross-sectional pilot study evaluates diagnostic accuracy of live colposcopy versus static image Swede-score evaluation for detecting significant precancerous cervical lesions greater than, or equal to grade 2 severity (CIN2+).MethodsVIA or HrHPV positive women were examined using a mobile colposcope, in a rural clinic in Kolkata, India. Live versus static Swede-score colposcopy assessments were made independently. All assessments were by gynecologists, junior or expert. Static image assessors were blinded to live scoring, patient information and final histopathology result. Primary outcome was the ability to detect CIN2+ lesions verified by directed biopsies. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for live versus static Swede-score in detecting CIN2+ lesions, as well as for interclass correlation.Results495 images from 94 VIA positive women were evaluated in this study. Thirteen women (13.9%) had CIN2+ on biopsy. No significant difference was found in the detection of CIN2+ lesions between live and static assessors (area under curve?=?0.69 versus 0.71, p?=?0.63). A Swede-score of 4+, had a sensitivity of 76.9% (95% CI 46.2-95.0%) and 84.6% (95% CI 54.6-98.1%), for live- and static-image assessment respectively. The corresponding positive predictive values were found to be 90.9% (95% CI 75.7-98.1%) and 92.6% (95% CI 75.7-99.1%). The interclass correlation was good (kappa statistic?=?0.60) for the senior static assessors.ConclusionsSwede-score evaluation of static colposcopy images was found to reliably detect CIN2+ lesions in this study. Larger studies are needed to further develop the colposcopy telemedicine concept which may offer reliable guidance in management where direct specialist input is not available.Trial registrationEthical approval of the study was obtained by the Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute (CNCI) Human Research Ethics Committee (4.311/27/2014). The trial was retrospectively registered in the Clinical Trails Registry of India CTRI/2018/03/012470 .

Project description:BACKGROUND:Intraoral scanners (IOSs) in implantology represent a viable approach for single teeth or partial arches. However, when used for complete edentulous arches or long-span edentulous areas, it has been demonstrated that there is a need for improvement of IOS-related techniques. Therefore, the aim of this in vitro study was to assess the trueness and precision of a complete arch digital impression on four and six implants taken with or without a customized, prosthetic-based impression template. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Two experimental models were prepared, representative of a complete edentulous mandible restored with four and six implants with built-in scan abutments. Models were scanned with (test group, TG) or without (control group, CG) the prosthetic-based impression template. Eight scans were taken for each model. The time needed to take impressions, error, trueness, and precision were evaluated. A statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS:In the case of four implants, the time needed for the impression was 128.7 ± 55.3 s in the TG and 81.0 ± 23.5 s in the CG (p = 0.0416). With six scan abutments, the time was 197.5 ± 26.8 and 110.6 ± 25.2 s in the TG and CG, respectively (p = 0.0000). In the TG, no errors were experienced, while in the CG, 13 impressions were retaken due to incorrect stitching processes. In the four-implant impression, the mean angle deviation was 0.252 ± 0.068° (95% CI 0.021-0.115°) in the CG and 0.134 ± 0.053° (95% CI 0.016-0.090°) in the TG. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). In the six-implant impression, the mean angle deviation was 0.373 ± 0.117° (95% CI 0.036-0.198°) in the CG and 0.100 ± 0.029° (95% CI 0.009-0.049°) in the TG (p = 0.000). In the TG, there were no statistically significant differences in the mean angle deviation within the group (p > 0.05), but there were in the CG. A colorimetric analysis showed higher deviations from the original model for the six-implant impression without a prosthetic template. CONCLUSIONS:Although all of the impressions exhibited deviation from the original model in the range of clinical acceptability, the prosthetic-based impression template significantly improved the trueness and precision of complete edentulous arches rehabilitated with four or six implants, making the complete arch digital impression more predictable.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Colposcopic Impression Based on Live Colposcopy and Evaluation of Static Digital Images.

Publications

Comparison of Colposcopic Impression Based on Live Colposcopy and Evaluation of Static Digital Images.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure