Gynecologic oncology · 2022
Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of colposcopic impression based on a single image versus a two-minute time series of colposcopic images.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Perkins Rebecca, Jeronimo Jose, Hammer Anne, Novetsky Akiva, Guido Richard, Del Pino Marta, Louwers Jaqueline, Marcus Jenna, Resende Ceres, Smith Katie, Egemen Didem, Befano Brian, Smith Debi, Antani Sameer, de Sanjose Silvia, Schiffman Mark
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Colposcopy is an important part of cervical screening/management programs. Colposcopic appearance is often classified, for teaching and telemedicine, based on static images that do not reveal the dynamics of acetowhitening. We compared the accuracy and reproducibility of colposcopic impression based on a single image at one minute after application of acetic acid versus a time-series of 17 sequential images over two minutes.
METHODS: Approximately 5000 colposcopic examinations conducted with the DYSIS colposcopic system were divided into 10 random sets, each assigned to a separate expert colposcopist. Colposcopists first classified single two-dimensional images at one minute and then a time-series of 17 sequential images as 'normal,' 'indeterminate,' 'high grade,' or 'cancer'. Ratings were compared to histologic diagnoses. Additionally, 5 colposcopists reviewed a subset of 200 single images and 200 time series to estimate intra- and inter-rater reliability.
RESULTS: Of 4640 patients with adequate images, only 24.4% were correctly categorized by single image visual assessment (11% of 64 cancers; 31% of 605 CIN3; 22.4% of 558 CIN2; 23.9% of 3412 < CIN2). Individual colposcopist accuracy was low; Youden indices (sensitivity plus specificity minus one) ranged from 0.07 to 0.24. Use of the time-series increased the proportion of images classified as normal, regardless of histology. Intra-rater reliability was substantial (weighted kappa = 0.64); inter-rater reliability was fair ( weighted kappa = 0.26).
CONCLUSION: Substantial variation exists in visual assessment of colposcopic images, even when a 17-image time series showing the two-minute process of acetowhitening is presented. We are currently evaluating whether deep-learning image evaluation can assist classification.
METHODS: Approximately 5000 colposcopic examinations conducted with the DYSIS colposcopic system were divided into 10 random sets, each assigned to a separate expert colposcopist. Colposcopists first classified single two-dimensional images at one minute and then a time-series of 17 sequential images as 'normal,' 'indeterminate,' 'high grade,' or 'cancer'. Ratings were compared to histologic diagnoses. Additionally, 5 colposcopists reviewed a subset of 200 single images and 200 time series to estimate intra- and inter-rater reliability.
RESULTS: Of 4640 patients with adequate images, only 24.4% were correctly categorized by single image visual assessment (11% of 64 cancers; 31% of 605 CIN3; 22.4% of 558 CIN2; 23.9% of 3412 < CIN2). Individual colposcopist accuracy was low; Youden indices (sensitivity plus specificity minus one) ranged from 0.07 to 0.24. Use of the time-series increased the proportion of images classified as normal, regardless of histology. Intra-rater reliability was substantial (weighted kappa = 0.64); inter-rater reliability was fair ( weighted kappa = 0.26).
CONCLUSION: Substantial variation exists in visual assessment of colposcopic images, even when a 17-image time series showing the two-minute process of acetowhitening is presented. We are currently evaluating whether deep-learning image evaluation can assist classification.