Diagnostic accuracy of clinical visual assessment using endoscopic images for nasal cavity mass lesions

Objectives: Discrimination of nasal cavity lesions using nasal endoscopy is challenging because of the differences in clinical manifestations and treatment strategies. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical visual assessment (CVA) of nasal cavity masses using endoscopic images a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Science progress (1916) 2024-04, Vol.107 (2), p.368504241248004-368504241248004
Hauptverfasser: Kwon, Kyung Won, Yu, Myeong Sang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives: Discrimination of nasal cavity lesions using nasal endoscopy is challenging because of the differences in clinical manifestations and treatment strategies. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical visual assessment (CVA) of nasal cavity masses using endoscopic images and determine whether there is a difference according to pathologic class and the examiners’ experience. Methods: We collected pathologically confirmed endoscopic images of normal findings, nasal polyp (NP), benign tumor, and malignant tumor (each class contained 100 images) randomly selected. Eighteen otolaryngologists, including six junior residents, six senior residents, and six board-certified rhinologists classified the test set images into four classes of lesions by CVA. Diagnostic performance according to the pathologic class and the examiner's experience level was evaluated based on overall accuracy, F1-score, confusion matrix, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Diagnostic performance was significantly different according to the pathological class of nasal cavity mass lesions with the overall accuracy reported high in the order of normal, NP, benign tumor, and malignant tumor (0.926 ± 0.100; 0.819 ± 0.135; 0.580 ± 0.112; 0.478 ± 0.187, respectively), F1 score (0.937 ± 0.076; 0.730 ± 0.093; 0.549 ± 0.080; 0.554 ± 0.146, respectively) and AUC value (0.96 ± 0.06; 0.84 ± 0.07; 0.70 ± 0.05; 0.71 ± 0.08, respectively). The expert rhinologist group achieved higher overall accuracy than the resident group (0.756 ± 0.157 vs. 0.680 ± 0.239, p 
ISSN:0036-8504
2047-7163
DOI:10.1177/00368504241248004