Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 10;30(12):1044–1054. doi: 10.5152/tjg.2019.19199

Table 5.

Overall technical success and clinical diagnostic outcome in our cohort, with the aggregated literature until 2017 (11).

Technical Success and Clinical Diagnostic Outcome Our Study Laleman (11)
Diagnostic success n (%) 39/41 (95.12) 631/691 (91.3)
SpyBite biopsy success n (%) 21/23 (91.3) 485/515 (94.2)
Therapeutic success n (%) 33/41 (80.5) 213/244 (87.3)
Visual Diagnosis
Sensitivity 93.3% (95% CI: 67.98–98.89) 90.8 % (95 % CI 84.8–95)
Specificity 87.5% (95% CI: 47.38–97.93) 90.9 % (95 % CI 85.4–94.8)
PPV 93.3% (95% CI: 67.98–98.89) 89.5 % (95 % CI 83.3–94.0)
NPV 87.5% (95% CI: 47.38–97.93) 92.0 % (95 % CI 86.7–95.7)
Accuracy 91% 90.8%
Biopsy Diagnosis
Sensitivity 80% (95% CI: 57.16–97.80 %) 72.4 % (95 % CI 64.7–79.3)
Specificity 87.5 ( 95% CI: 58.93–100) 100 % (95 % CI 96.8–100)
PPV 100% (95% CI: 73.35–100.00) 100 % (95 % CI 96.8–100)
NPV 77.7% (95% CI: 40.06–96.53) 72.4 % (95 % CI 64.7–79)
Accuracy 82.6% (19/23) 84%
Brush Cytology Diagnosis
Sensitivity 26.6%, N.A
Specificity 75% N.A
PPV 100% (95% CI: 40.23–100.00) N.A
NPV 42.8% (95% CI: 17.76–71.08 ) N.A
Accuracy 43.5% (10/23). N.A
Visual/Biopsy Diagnosis Concordance 56% (13/23) for malignancy
43.4% (10/23) for benign changes
74 % (17/23), 85 % (41/48) (5,12)