Premium
Meta‐analysis of confocal laser endomicroscopy for the diagnosis of gastric neoplasia and adenocarcinoma
Author(s) -
Qian Wei,
Bai Tao,
Wang Huan,
Zhang Lei,
Song Jun,
Hou Xiao Hua
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of digestive diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.684
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1751-2980
pISSN - 1751-2972
DOI - 10.1111/1751-2980.12357
Subject(s) - medicine , adenocarcinoma , intraepithelial neoplasia , endomicroscopy , gastroenterology , receiver operating characteristic , pathology , cancer , confocal , prostate , geometry , mathematics
Objective Confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) is a recently developed technique used to diagnose gastrointestinal diseases. The current meta‐analysis aimed to systematically assess the ability of CLE to diagnose neoplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for endomicroscopy, gastric neoplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma. Sensitivity and specificity data on the diagnosis of neoplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma were pooled. A summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curve was performed and the area under the curve was calculated. Results In all, 13 studies were included in the current study. The pooled sensitivity and specificity assessing CLE as a method to diagnose gastric neoplasia were 0.81 and 0.98, respectively. For the diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.89 and 0.99, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.82 and 0.95 when differentiating high‐grade intraepithelial neoplasia from low‐grade intraepithelial neoplasia. Additionally, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.87 and 0.96, respectively, when distinguishing undifferentiated gastric adenocarcinoma from differentiated gastric adenocarcinoma. Conclusion CLE has a high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing gastric intraepithelial neoplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma; therefore, it could be considered an alternative to the endoscopic method used to diagnose gastric intraepithelial neoplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma.