Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358 |
Resumo: | Abstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone. |
id |
ABORL-F-1_670c4bdd252e18079732d918208a7b85 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1808-86942022000300358 |
network_acronym_str |
ABORL-F-1 |
network_name_str |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysisMouth neoplasmsChemiluminescencePrecancerous conditionsTolonium chlorideAbstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone.Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.2022-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.88 n.3 2022reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngologyinstname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)instacron:ABORL-CCF10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.06.011info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKim,Do HyunLee,JaeyoonLee,Min HyeongKim,Sung WonHwang,Se Hwaneng2022-06-23T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1808-86942022000300358Revistahttp://www.bjorl.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br1808-86861808-8686opendoar:2022-06-23T00:00Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
spellingShingle |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Kim,Do Hyun Mouth neoplasms Chemiluminescence Precancerous conditions Tolonium chloride |
title_short |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort |
Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
author |
Kim,Do Hyun |
author_facet |
Kim,Do Hyun Lee,Jaeyoon Lee,Min Hyeong Kim,Sung Won Hwang,Se Hwan |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Lee,Jaeyoon Lee,Min Hyeong Kim,Sung Won Hwang,Se Hwan |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Kim,Do Hyun Lee,Jaeyoon Lee,Min Hyeong Kim,Sung Won Hwang,Se Hwan |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Mouth neoplasms Chemiluminescence Precancerous conditions Tolonium chloride |
topic |
Mouth neoplasms Chemiluminescence Precancerous conditions Tolonium chloride |
description |
Abstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.06.011 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.88 n.3 2022 reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology instname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF) instacron:ABORL-CCF |
instname_str |
Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF) |
instacron_str |
ABORL-CCF |
institution |
ABORL-CCF |
reponame_str |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology |
collection |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br |
_version_ |
1754575994958643200 |