2012
DOI: 10.1002/hed.23189
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of optical coherence tomography to discriminate lesions of the upper aerodigestive tract

Abstract: OCT complements visual inspection for differentiating UADT-lesions.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
33
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
(38 reference statements)
2
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Classification of autofluorescence endoscopy images by an experienced head and neck surgeon has a better sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy than white light endoscopy of 91% versus 73%, 84% versus 79%, and 88% versus 77%, respectively . For optical coherence tomography, a sensitivity and specificity of 77.8% to 100% and 70.3% to 75.8%, respectively, is reported to differentiate an invasive from a noninvasive lesion in the upper aerodigestive tract . Using high‐resolution microendoscopy to image neoplastic versus nonneoplastic oral cancer, subjective image interpretation yielded sensitivity and specificity of 85% to 90% and 80% to 85%, respectively, whereas an objective classification algorithm achieved sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 77%, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Classification of autofluorescence endoscopy images by an experienced head and neck surgeon has a better sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy than white light endoscopy of 91% versus 73%, 84% versus 79%, and 88% versus 77%, respectively . For optical coherence tomography, a sensitivity and specificity of 77.8% to 100% and 70.3% to 75.8%, respectively, is reported to differentiate an invasive from a noninvasive lesion in the upper aerodigestive tract . Using high‐resolution microendoscopy to image neoplastic versus nonneoplastic oral cancer, subjective image interpretation yielded sensitivity and specificity of 85% to 90% and 80% to 85%, respectively, whereas an objective classification algorithm achieved sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 77%, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…UADT), flexible OCT probes provide resolutions on the order of 10 mm and penetration depths of 2 mm into soft tissues. The predominant diagnostic feature is the recognition of the integrity of the basement membrane, identifying early invasive lesions by the loss of contrast between the epithelial and connective tissue layers with a high sensitivity [12][13][14].…”
Section: Sectional Imaging Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…OCT has been applied in intraoperative margin detection in cutaneous, vulvar, breast, and gastro-intestinal malignancy [47][48][49][50][51] . OCT has been examined in several diagnostic/detection applications in the head and neck such as larynx, oral, and esophageal cancer however studies examining the ability of OCT to determine the accuracy intra-operative margins are less common [20,21,49,[52][53][54][55][56][57] . Hamdoon et al, examined the use of OCT for intraoperative margin evaluation in twenty-eight T1-T2 N0M0 oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma patients.…”
Section: Optical Coherence Tomography (Oct)mentioning
confidence: 99%