Background and Aims. Magnifying chromoendoscopy (ME-CE) through the observation of pit patterns is a productive way to distinguish between neoplastic and nonneoplastic polyps. Magnifying optical enhancement technology (ME-OE) is an emerging virtual chromoendoscopy imaging technology and appeared to be a promising approach. However, this information is currently not available. This study is aimed at comparing the differential diagnostic value of ME-CE and OE for neoplastic and nonneoplastic polyps. Patients and Methods. Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized (1 : 1) into examination by ME-OE or ME-CE. Histopathological findings were utilized as the reference standard. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of two endoscopy methods were compared using ME-OE (were classified according to the JNET classification) and ME-CE (were classified according to the Kudo pit pattern classification), respectively, and the time to predict the histological polyp type was compared. And the agreements between the pathological and clinical diagnosis by ME-OE or ME-CE were analyzed. Results. A total of 365 polyps were found in the 220 patients included (ME-OE: 185; ME-CE: 180.202 had nonneoplastic polyps, 163 had neoplastic polyps). The diagnostic accuracy of ME-OE was higher than that of ME-CE (93% vs. 92%, ). The average diagnosis time was lower in ME-OE than ME-CE ( vs. , ). The agreements between the pathological and clinical diagnosis were at least substantial in both groups. Conclusion. ME-OE was superlative to ME-CE in predicting the histology of polyps. OE devoted classification would possibly similarly enhance the endoscopist performance. The trial is registered with ChiCT2000032075.

中文翻译：

---

放大色素内镜和放大光学增强技术在结直肠息肉分类中的价值：一项前瞻性对照研究

背景和目标。通过观察凹坑图案放大色素内镜 (ME-CE) 是区分肿瘤性息肉和非肿瘤性息肉的有效方法。放大光学增强技术 (ME-OE) 是一种新兴的虚拟色素内窥镜成像技术，似乎是一种很有前途的方法。但是，此信息目前不可用。本研究旨在比较 ME-CE 和 OE 对肿瘤性和非肿瘤性息肉的鉴别诊断价值。患者和方法. 连续接受结肠镜检查的患者被随机（1:1）接受 ME-OE 或 ME-CE 检查。组织病理学结果被用作参考标准。分别使用ME-OE（根据JNET分类）和ME-CE（根据工藤坑模式分类）比较两种内窥镜检查方法的准确性、敏感性、特异性和阳性和阴性预测值，和比较了预测组织学息肉类型的时间。并分析ME-OE或ME-CE病理诊断与临床诊断的一致性。结果. 在纳入的 220 名患者中，共发现 365 个息肉（ME-OE：185；ME-CE：180.202 例有非肿瘤性息肉，163 例有肿瘤性息肉）。ME-OE 的诊断准确性高于 ME-CE (93% vs. 92%,）。ME-OE 的平均诊断时间低于 ME-CE (对比, ）。在两组中，病理学和临床诊断之间的一致性至少是实质性的。结论。ME-OE 在预测息肉的组织学方面优于 ME-CE。OE 专用分类可能同样会提高内镜医师的表现。该试验已在 ChiCT2000032075 注册。