Can we shorten the small-bowel capsule reading time with the “Quick-view” image detection system?

Abstract Background The mean small-bowel capsule reading time is about 60 min, and shortening this reading time is a major aim. Aim To evaluate the efficiency of the “Quick-view” detection algorithm. Methods Multicentre prospective comparative study. One hundred and six small bowel capsule films fro...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Digestive and liver disease 2012-06, Vol.44 (6), p.477-481
Hauptverfasser: Saurin, Jean-Christophe, Lapalus, Marie Georges, Cholet, Frank, D’Halluin, Pierre Nicolas, Filoche, Bernard, Gaudric, Marianne, Sacher-Huvelin, Sylvie, Savalle, Camille, Frederic, Murielle, Adenis Lamarre, Patrick, Ben Soussan, Emmanuel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Background The mean small-bowel capsule reading time is about 60 min, and shortening this reading time is a major aim. Aim To evaluate the efficiency of the “Quick-view” detection algorithm. Methods Multicentre prospective comparative study. One hundred and six small bowel capsule films from 12 centres reviewed in Quick-view mode by 12 experienced readers. Reading time, image relevance, and comparison of Quick-view reading results to results of initial reading. Review of discordant result by 3 experts. Results The mean reading time in Quick-view mode was of 11.6 min (2–27). Concordant negative results were obtained in 41 cases (38.6%) and concordant positive results in 35 cases (33.0%). A discordant result was obtained in 30 (28.3%) cases: 21 false positive cases (initial reading 12 cases, Quick-view reading 9 cases), 14 false negative cases (initial reading 7, Quick-view 7). Four out of 7 lesions missed at Quick-view reading were not present on the Quick-view film (theoretical sensitivity 93.5%). Conclusion The Quick-view informatic algorithm detected nearly 94% of significant lesions, and Quick-view reading was as efficient as the initial reading and much shorter. These results are to be confirmed by further studies, but suggest an excellent sensitivity for the Quick-view algorithm.
ISSN:1590-8658
1878-3562
DOI:10.1016/j.dld.2011.12.021