International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021
Reliability and diagnostic performance of smartphone colposcopy.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Aydın Serdar, Karasu Ayse F G, Maraşlı Mustafa, Bademler Neslihan, Kıran Gürkan, Dural Hanife R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the interobserver and intraobserver reliability of smartphone colposcopy (SPC) versus conventional colposcopy and to determine diagnostic performance.
METHODS: A smartphone back camera was used to capture cervical images before and after application of acetic acid, and after application of lugol solution. Captured images were reviewed independently by two experienced colposcopists and findings were noted as per colposcopy. Smartphone-based diagnostic performance was calculated, and kappa statistics were used for measurement of agreement between SPC and conventional colposcopy findings.
RESULTS: A total of 114 women were included in the study. The kappa statistic for intraobserver reliability was 0.77 for both normal colposcopic findings and the transformation zone, indicating substantial agreement. Kappa values were 0.54 for acetowhite epithelium, 0.51 for lugol staining, and 0.51-0.60 for atypical vascularization. Kappa values for interobserver reliability were 0.76 for normal colposcopic findings, 0.56 for acetowhite epithelium, and 0.60 for lugol staining. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of SPC for CIN2+ were 88.2 (95% CI, 72.5-96.7), 48.7 (95% CI, 37.4-60.2), 0.42 (95% CI, 0.36-0.48), and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-0.96), respectively.
CONCLUSION: SPC showed substantial agreement between the histologic diagnoses based on the captured images and conventional colposcopic findings.
METHODS: A smartphone back camera was used to capture cervical images before and after application of acetic acid, and after application of lugol solution. Captured images were reviewed independently by two experienced colposcopists and findings were noted as per colposcopy. Smartphone-based diagnostic performance was calculated, and kappa statistics were used for measurement of agreement between SPC and conventional colposcopy findings.
RESULTS: A total of 114 women were included in the study. The kappa statistic for intraobserver reliability was 0.77 for both normal colposcopic findings and the transformation zone, indicating substantial agreement. Kappa values were 0.54 for acetowhite epithelium, 0.51 for lugol staining, and 0.51-0.60 for atypical vascularization. Kappa values for interobserver reliability were 0.76 for normal colposcopic findings, 0.56 for acetowhite epithelium, and 0.60 for lugol staining. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of SPC for CIN2+ were 88.2 (95% CI, 72.5-96.7), 48.7 (95% CI, 37.4-60.2), 0.42 (95% CI, 0.36-0.48), and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-0.96), respectively.
CONCLUSION: SPC showed substantial agreement between the histologic diagnoses based on the captured images and conventional colposcopic findings.