Comparison of white-light endoscopy, optical-enhanced and acetic-acid magnifying endoscopy for detecting gastric intestinal metaplasia: A randomized trial

Table 1 Demographic and main clinical characteristics of the subjects

Parameter		Value
Number		156
Gender (M/F)		83/73
Age (mean ± SD), yr	M	58.9 ± 8.9
	F	58.5 ± 7.9
Physical examination		22
Symptoms
Upper abdominal discomfort/pain		30
Anemia		13
Acid reflux/heartburn		37
Suspected peptic ulcer		9
Dyspepsia		45
Medical history
Smoking habit		52
Alcohol consumption		57
Helicobacter pylori infection		31
Family history of gastric cancer		12

SD: Standard deviation.

Table 2 Diagnostic accuracy of three endoscopic methods for patients with gastric intestinal metaplasia

	Sensitivity	Specificity	PPV	NPV	Accuracy	P value
WLE	39.7%	61.4%	44.3%	56.8%	51.9%	0.001
ME-OE	92.6%	90.9%	88.7%	94.1%	91.7%		0.001
ME-AAC	85.3%	87.5%	84.1%	88.5%	86.5%

WLE: White-light endoscopy; ME-OE: Optical-enhanced magnifying endoscopy; ME-AAC: Acetic-acid chromoendoscopy combined with magnifying endoscopy; PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value.

Table 3 Diagnostic accuracy of three endoscopic methods for gastric intestinal metaplasia sites

	Sensitivity	Specificity	PPV	NPV	Accuracy	P value
WLE	29.5%	96.1%	80.2%	71.9%	73%	0.001
ME-OE	82.9%	93.3%	86.9%	91.2%	89.7%		0.011
ME-AAC	79.9%	88.7%	79.0%	89.2%	85.6%

WLE: White-light endoscopy; ME-OE: Optical-enhanced magnifying endoscopy; ME-AAC: Acetic-acid chromoendoscopy combined with magnifying endoscopy; PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value.

Table 4 Diagnostic ability of the four endoscopists for gastric intestinal metaplasia

Endoscopist	Sensitivity	Specificity	PPV	NPV	Accuracy
Expert Liang	85%	80%	89.5%	72.7%	83.3%
Expert Xu	80%	90%	94.1%	69.2%	83.3%
Non-expert Chang	65%	80%	86.7%	53.3%	76.7%
Non-expert Qu	75%	90%	93.8%	64.3%	80%

PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value.

Table 5 Diagnostic ability of experts, non-experts, and all observers for gastric intestinal metaplasia

	Sensitivity	Specificity	PPV	NPV	Accuracy
Experts (n = 2)	82.5%	85%	91.7%	70.8%	83.3%
Non-experts (n = 2)	70%	85%	90.3%	58.6%	75%
All observers (n = 4)	76.3%	85%	91.0%	64.1%	79.2%

PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value.

Table 6 Inter-observer agreement and intra-observer agreement

Inter-observer agreement		Intra-observer agreement
Experts (n = 2)	0.862	Expert Liang	0.713
		Expert Xu	0.724
Non-experts (n = 2)	0.800	Non-expert Chang	0.667
		Non-expert Qu	0.598