2019International Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsRequires access

Comparison of the AV Magnivisualizer device with colposcopy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using the Swede scoring system

Utkarsh Dayal, Bindiya Gupta, Roopa Hariprasad, Rashmi Shriya, Shalini Rajaram, Bhavya Prasad, Ravi Mehrotra

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the AV Magnivisualizer with colposcopy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) using the Swede scoring system. METHODS: Cross-sectional study conducted in a tertiary care hospital from May 2017 to March 2018. One hundred women with positive results at visual inspection with acetic acid underwent cervical inspection using the Magnivisualizer followed by a colposcope. Biopsies were taken if the Swede score was greater than 4. Pregnant women, women with an obvious cervical growth, acute cervicitis, or prior cervical surgery were excluded. Diagnostic accuracy of the Magnivisualizer and colposcope was calculated for high-grade lesions (CIN 2/CIN 2+) and agreement was compared between the two modalities. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Magnivisualizer were 88.2%, 70.0%, 50.0%, and 94.6%, respectively, to detect high-grade lesions at a Swede score cutoff of 5 or more. The area under the curve for the Magnivisualizer was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.92), which was comparable with colposcopy (AUC 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.96). There was very good agreement between the Magnivisualizer and colposcopy (κ=0.865, P<0.001) for high-grade lesions. CONCLUSION: The Magnivisualizer had high diagnostic accuracy to detect high-grade CIN in screen-positive women, which was comparable with colposcopy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare the AV Magnivisualizer with colposcopy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) using the Swede scoring system. METHODS: Cross-sectional study conducted in a tertiary care hospital from May 2017 to March 2018. One hundred women with positive results at visual inspection with acetic acid underwent cervical inspection using the Magnivisualizer followed by a colposcope. Biopsies were taken if the Swede score was greater than 4. Pregnant women, women with an obvious cervical growth, acute cervicitis, or prior cervical surgery were excluded. Diagnostic accuracy of the Magnivisualizer and colposcope was calculated for high-grade lesions (CIN 2/CIN 2+) and agreement was compared between the two modalities. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Magnivisualizer were 88.2%, 70.0%, 50.0%, and 94.6%, respectively, to detect high-grade lesions at a Swede score cutoff of 5 or more. The area under the curve for the Magnivisualizer was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.92), which was comparable with colposcopy (AUC 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.96). There was very good agreement between the Magnivisualizer and colposcopy (κ=0.865, P<0.001) for high-grade lesions. CONCLUSION: The Magnivisualizer had high diagnostic accuracy to detect high-grade CIN in screen-positive women, which was comparable with colposcopy.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the AV Magnivisualizer with colposcopy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) using the Swede scoring system. METHODS: Cross-sectional study conducted in a tertiary care hospital from May 2017 to March 2018. One hundred women with positive results at visual inspection with acetic acid underwent cervical inspection using the Magnivisualizer followed by a colposcope. Biopsies were taken if the Swede score was greater than 4. Pregnant women, women with an obvious cervical growth, acute cervicitis, or prior cervical surgery were excluded. Diagnostic accuracy of the Magnivisualizer and colposcope was calculated for high-grade lesions (CIN 2/CIN 2+) and agreement was compared between the two modalities. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Magnivisualizer were 88.2%, 70.0%, 50.0%, and 94.6%, respectively, to detect high-grade lesions at a Swede score cutoff of 5 or more. The area under the curve for the Magnivisualizer was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.92), which was comparable with colposcopy (AUC 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.96). There was very good agreement between the Magnivisualizer and colposcopy (κ=0.865, P<0.001) for high-grade lesions. CONCLUSION: The Magnivisualizer had high diagnostic accuracy to detect high-grade CIN in screen-positive women, which was comparable with colposcopy.

Key concepts: Colposcopy, Medicine, Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, Receiver operating characteristic, Gynecology, Cervicitis, Tertiary care, Obstetrics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of the AV Magnivisualizer device with colposcopy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using the Swede scoring system — Research Paper | ScholarLens