MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1979318166 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.11011

What is the future of virtual cystoscopy in urology?

2011· article· en· W1979318166 sur OpenAlexaffvenue
Alexandre R. Zlotta

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Établissements canadiensMount Sinai Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCystoscopyUrologyMedicineGeneral surgeryUrinary systemInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Replacing invasive diagnostic procedures with non-invasive, sensitive and specific imaging techniques is a growing trend in medicine today. Over 1500 publications can be found using a PubMed search on “virtual colonoscopy,” however, only 87 publications deal with “virtual cystoscopy.” Why are urologists lagging so far behind gastroenterologists? Virtual colonoscopy (computed tomography [CT], colonoscopy) is increasingly used as a screening method to detect colon cancer. Safer, quicker and less invasive than conventional colonoscopy, this technique uses a 60-second CT scan of the abdomen, along with 3-D reconstructed images, to view the inside of the colon. The CT virtual colonoscopy does not require sedation and can be completed in 15 minutes. In a New England Journal of Medicine publication on asymptomatic adults, CT colonographic screening identified 90% of subjects with adenomas or cancers measuring 10 mm or more in diameter.1 These findings further supported published data on the role of CT colonography in screening patients with an average risk of colorectal cancer.2 Many physicians in the United States thought that the recent accumulation of data showing the effectiveness of virtual colonoscopy as a screening tool for colorectal cancer would be enough to ensure that the procedure would be covered under Medicare. They were wrong. Last year, United States Medicare claimed that, due to an inadequate amount of evidence showing that CT colonography is an appropriate screening test, they would not cover the procedure.3 In recent years, virtual cystoscopy has been evaluated as a potential diagnostic tool in the urological community. However, there are major differences between flexible cystoscopy and colonoscopy. A colonoscopy requires a 6-foot long probe to view the entire colon, carries a small risk of bowel perforation and takes about 30 minutes. In sharp contrast, flexible cystoscopy is performed in a couple of minutes using a thin flexible scope. The procedure is considered somewhat invasive and potentially causes some discomfort, but flexible cystoscopy by no means compares to a colonoscopy. Side effects of cystoscopy include infection, but they are certainly not life-threatening complications like bowel perforation. In the present paper published in this issue of the CUAJ, the authors evaluated bladder lesions with computed tomographic virtual cystoscopy in 25 patients and they compared these results with conventional cystoscopy and pathological findings.4 Virtual cystoscopy detected tumours as small as 2 × 3 mm. Interestingly, out of 38 lesions detected by virtual cystoscopy, 17 were smaller than 1 cm and many of these lesions, especially at the bladder dome, would have been missed with an ultrasound procedure. Cytology was suboptimal, identifying only 3 positive patients. Virtual cystoscopy was feasible in case of bleeding where conventional cystoscopy proved difficult to perform. The authors admitted that despite their encouraging results, virtual cystoscopy cannot completely replace cystoscopy at the present time. It remains to be seen who will ultimately become the winner: miniature scopes or virtual imaging techniques. These 2 techniques are not necessarily mutually exclusive and it makes sense that in the near future, virtual cystoscopy may play an increasing role as a first-line screening test to evaluate patients at risk for bladder cancer or who present with symptoms like hematuria. One of the major drawbacks of any radiological technique, as sophisticated and refined as it could become, is that many bladder lesions start as tiny flat lesions more likely to be identified by narrow-band imaging or fluorescence cystoscopy rather than by any imaging technique requiring a minimal tumour volume. Inescapably though, it is likely that in the next decade, medicine will move more and more towards completely non-invasive diagnostic techniques, including functional imaging rather than invasive procedures even minimally invasive.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,013
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,016
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,070

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0130,023
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,006
Communication savante0,0060,018
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0100,009
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0160,003

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,230
Écart entre enseignants0,216 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2011
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Urological Association JournalMême sujetColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionTravaux en français237 207