Table 2.
Performance of advanced endoscopic imaging in the diagnosis of esophageal cancer according to systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
| Author | Endoscopic Technique | Disease | Sensitivity (95% CI, %) |
Specificity (95% CI, %) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coletta et al. [49] | AA Chromoendoscopy | EAC | 92% (83 to 97) |
96% (85 to 99) |
| Morita et al. [50] | Lugol Chromoendoscopy | ESCC | 92% (86 to 96) |
82% (80 to 85) |
| Thosani et al. [51] | NBI | EAC | 94.2% (82.6 to 98.2) |
94.4% (80.5 to 98.6) |
| Morita et al. [50] | ESCC | 88% (86 to 93) |
88% (86 to 90) |
|
| Thosani et al. [51] | pCLE * | EAC | 90.4% (71.9 to 97.2) |
92.7% (87 to 96) |
| Kohli et al. [52] | VLE # | EC | 81–97% | 57–92% |
* Performance refers to detection of dysplasia; # evidence from a systematic review without meta-analysis. Abbreviations: AA, acetic acid; NBI, narrow-band imaging; pCLE, probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy; VLE, volumetric laser endomicroscopy; ESCC, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; EAC, esophageal adenocarcinoma; EC, esophageal cancer.