Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Dig Liver Dis ; 44(6): 477-81, 2012 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22281376

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.


Subject(s)
Algorithms , Capsule Endoscopy/instrumentation , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/instrumentation , Software , Computational Biology , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Observer Variation , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...