Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology · 2022
Linked color imaging-based endoscopic grading of gastric intestinal metaplasia and histological gastritis staging in the assessment of gastric cancer risk.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zheng Jin, Zhang Guanpo, Gao Chao, Xu Guilin, Lin Wulian, Jiang Chuanshen, Li Dazhou, Wang Wen
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value and compare the effectiveness of linked color imaging-based endoscopic grading of gastric intestinal metaplasia (LCI-EGGIM) and operative link on gastric intestinal metaplasia (OLGIM) in risk stratification of early gastric cancer (EGC).
METHODS: Eighty-one patients with EGC who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection were included. The general data and EGC-related risk factors of all participants were recorded. LCI-EGGIM and OLGIM were used for both groups.
RESULTS: The number of patients with LCI-EGGIM score ≥ 5 was significantly higher in the EGC group than in the control group (58.02% vs. 12.35%, p < .001). Furthermore, the number of patients with OLGIM stage III/IV in the EGC group was significantly higher than that in the control group (56.79% vs. 7.41%, p < .001). Multivariate analysis showed that OLGIM stage III/IV (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 29.74, 95% CI: 7.49-117.94) and LCI-EGGIM score ≥ 5 (AOR: 12.33, 95% CI: 3.71-41.02) were significantly associated with EGC. There was no significant difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between LCI-EGGIM and OLGIM in predicting the risk of EGC (0.74 vs. 0.77, p = .1116).
CONCLUSION: OLGIM and LCI-EGGIM can be used and have the same value for predicting the risk stratification of EGC in patients with gastric intestinal metaplasia.
METHODS: Eighty-one patients with EGC who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection were included. The general data and EGC-related risk factors of all participants were recorded. LCI-EGGIM and OLGIM were used for both groups.
RESULTS: The number of patients with LCI-EGGIM score ≥ 5 was significantly higher in the EGC group than in the control group (58.02% vs. 12.35%, p < .001). Furthermore, the number of patients with OLGIM stage III/IV in the EGC group was significantly higher than that in the control group (56.79% vs. 7.41%, p < .001). Multivariate analysis showed that OLGIM stage III/IV (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 29.74, 95% CI: 7.49-117.94) and LCI-EGGIM score ≥ 5 (AOR: 12.33, 95% CI: 3.71-41.02) were significantly associated with EGC. There was no significant difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between LCI-EGGIM and OLGIM in predicting the risk of EGC (0.74 vs. 0.77, p = .1116).
CONCLUSION: OLGIM and LCI-EGGIM can be used and have the same value for predicting the risk stratification of EGC in patients with gastric intestinal metaplasia.