4.2 Article

Clinical evaluation of an autofluorescence diagnostic device for oral cancer detection: a prospective randomized diagnostic study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION
卷 21, 期 5, 页码 460-466

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0b013e32834fdb6d

关键词

autofluorescence diagnostic test; biopsy; detection; oral cancer; VELscope

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prognosis for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma remains poor despite advances in multimodal treatment concepts. Early diagnosis and treatment is the key to improved patient survival. A device (VELscope) that uses autofluorescence technology, allowing direct fluorescence visualization of the oral cavity, might be a useful tool for oral cancer detection or as an adjunct to standard clinical examination. A total of 289 patients with oral premalignant lesions were randomly divided into two groups for clinical examination of precancerous oral lesions. In group 1, 166 patients were examined conventionally with white light, and in group 2, 123 patients were examined with the autofluorescence visualization device (VELscope) in addition to the white light examination. Biopsies were obtained from all suspicious areas identified in both examination groups (n=52). In the first step, baseline characteristics of the two groups (only white light vs. white light and VELscope) were compared to exclude selection bias. In the second step, for the group examined with white light and VELscope (123 patients), the diagnostic strategies were compared with regard to sensitivity and specificity using biopsy as the gold standard. The results showed that using the VELscope leads to higher sensitivity (100% instead of 17%), but to lower specificity (74% instead of 97%). Thus, we can conclude that the VELscope is a useful new diagnostic device for detection of oral cancer diseases. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 21:460-466 (C) 2012 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据