5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development and validation of a computed assessment of cleansing score for evaluation of quality of small-bowel visualization in capsule endoscopy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background and study aims

           An objective and reliable scoring system is needed to assess quality of visualization in small bowel (SB) capsule endoscopy (CE), for both clinical practice and research purposes. The aim of this study was to establish and to validate a SB-computed assessment of cleansing (SB-CAC) score.

          Patients and methods

           Thirty-three SB-CE were selected. A CAC score, defined as the ratio of the red over green pixels (R/G ratio), was calculated for each frame. Intervals were then determined, ranging from the lowest to the highest ratio among the extracted frames. Twelve frames were randomly selected in each of these intervals. Two hundred eighty-eight frames were shuffled and analyzed twice in random order by two experienced CE readers who were blinded to the CAC scores. Once an “adequately cleansed” or “inadequately cleansed” qualification was allotted to every still frame, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was created. In case of discrepancy between the two readers, the still frames were excluded. A second dataset of 288 different SB still frames was generated and read twice in random order by two other experienced SB-CE readers, using the same methodology.

          Results

           A SB-CAC score threshold of 1.6 best achieved discrimination of adequately from inadequately cleansed frames, with a sensitivity of 92.7 % (95 %CI [89.7 – 95.8]) and a specificity of 92.9 % (95 %CI [89.9 – 95.9]). This threshold was validated using the second dataset, yielding the following performances: sensitivity 91.3 % (95 %CI [87.9 – 94.6]), specificity 94.7 % (95 %CI [92.1 – 97.3]).

          Conclusion

           An SB-CAC score of 1.6 has the highest sensitivity and specificity to discriminate “adequately cleansed” from “inadequately cleansed” SB-CE still frames. This constitutes an objective, reproducible, reliable, and automated cleansing score for SB-CE.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale.

          The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) is a novel bowel cleanliness rating scale that has undergone partial validation previously. To fully validate the BBPS and assess the ease of its dissemination. Observational study. Various endoscopy units worldwide. Endoscopists. Video recordings of colonoscopies with varying degrees of cleanliness were viewed twice by gastroenterologists at 1 medical center. For each video, participants assigned segment and total BBPS scores. Endoscopists worldwide were also surveyed about their experience with the BBPS after viewing an instructional video. Intraclass correlation coefficients and weighted κ values assessed inter- and intrarater reliability, respectively. The BBPS was used among 983 patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. The BBPS demonstrated near-perfect interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.91) and substantial intrarater reliability (weighted κ = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.84). Among 983 colonoscopies, right and left colon segment scores of 2 or 3 had a multivariate odds ratio of 1.60 (95% CI, 1.01-2.55) and 2.58 (95% CI, 1.34-4.98), respectively, for polyp detection compared with segment scores of 0 or 1. Endoscopists from a variety of settings worldwide found the BBPS easy to implement and applicable to their patient population. Single-center reliability testing. The BBPS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing bowel cleanliness during colonoscopy. Segment scores may represent a standardized way to determine bowel preparation adequacy. The BBPS can be easily disseminated through the use of a brief instructional video. Copyright © 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable.

            Standardized reporting systems for diagnostic and screening tests facilitate quality improvement programs and clear communication among health care providers. Although colonoscopy is commonly used for screening, diagnosis, and therapy, no standardized reporting system for this procedure currently exists. The Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable developed a reporting and data system for colonoscopy based on continuous quality improvement indicators. The Task Group systematically reviewed quality indicators recommended by the Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and developed consensus-based terminology for reporting and data systems to capture these data elements. The Task Group included experts in several disciplines: gastroenterology, primary care, diagnostic imaging, and health care delivery. The standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system provides a tool that can be used for efforts in continuous quality improvement within and across practices that use colonoscopy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Expert opinions and scientific evidence for colonoscopy key performance indicators

              Colonoscopy is a widely performed procedure with procedural volumes increasing annually throughout the world. Many procedures are now performed as part of colorectal cancer screening programmes. Colonoscopy should be of high quality and measures of this quality should be evidence based. New UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards have been developed by a working group with consensus agreement on each standard reached. This paper reviews the scientific basis for each of the quality measures published in the UK standards.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Endosc Int Open
                Endosc Int Open
                10.1055/s-00025476
                Endoscopy International Open
                © Georg Thieme Verlag KG (Stuttgart · New York )
                2364-3722
                2196-9736
                June 2018
                25 May 2018
                : 6
                : 6
                : E646-E651
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Saint-Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, 184 rue du Faubourg Saint Antoine, 75012, Paris, France
                [2 ]ETIS UMR 8051, University Paris-Seine, University of Cergy-Pontoise, ENSEA, CNRS, Cergy, France
                [3 ]Sorbonne University, Paris, France
                [4 ]Saint Joseph Hospital, Paris, France
                [5 ]College of Arts and Sciences, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
                Author notes
                Corresponding author Xavier Dray, MD, PhD Endoscopy Unit Sorbonne University & APHP Saint Antoine Hospital 184 rue du Faubourg Saint Antoine75012 Paris, France+0033-1-49-28-29-70 xavier.dray@ 123456aphp.fr
                Article
                10.1055/a-0581-8758
                5979189
                afc735a0-e7b3-4fe1-bb48-b7586f338441

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 12 August 2017
                : 25 January 2018
                Categories
                Original article

                Comments

                Comment on this article