Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2025 Sep;102(3):337-344.e1.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2025.02.015. Epub 2025 Feb 15.

Optical enhancement with magnification versus white-light endoscopy for detecting gastric intestinal metaplasia and neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Optical enhancement with magnification versus white-light endoscopy for detecting gastric intestinal metaplasia and neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial

Meng Wan et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2025 Sep.

Abstract

Background and aims: The detection of gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM), gastric intraepithelial neoplasia (GIN), and early gastric cancer (EGC) using white-light endoscopy (WLE) is unsatisfactory. This study assessed the value of optical enhancement combined with magnification endoscopy (ME-OE) versus WLE for detecting GIM, GIN, and EGC.

Methods: Patients at high risk for gastric cancer were randomly assigned to the ME-OE group or WLE group at a 1:1 ratio. Suspicious GIM, GIN, and EGC lesions underwent targeted biopsy sampling in both groups. The diagnostic yield, diagnostic efficacy, and agreement of suspicious lesions were compared between the 2 groups.

Results: Two hundred eighty-five patients were finally analyzed. The per-patient diagnostic yields of GIM, GIN, and EGC were 36.6% in the ME-OE group and 23.8% in the WLE group (P = .018). The per-lesion diagnostic yield of GIM, GIN, and EGC in the ME-OE group was higher than that in the WLE group (66.7% vs 48.7%, P = .017). Sensitivity (82.8% vs 54.3%, P = .003), specificity (84.2% vs 81.4%, P = .738), positive predictive value (88.9% vs 70.4%, P = .038), negative predictive value (76.2% vs 68.6%, P = .419), and accuracy (83.3% vs 69.2%, P = .028) for GIM were compared between the 2 groups. The intraobserver agreements of experienced endoscopists were excellent for ME-OE (κ = 0.81 and κ = 0.83) and good for WLE (κ = 0.63 and κ = 0.62). The interobserver agreements of experienced endoscopists were good for both groups (κ = 0.75 and κ = 0.61, respectively).

Conclusions: ME-OE showed better performance for detecting GIM than WLE in high-risk populations. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04411589.).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure All authors disclosed no financial relationships. This study was funded by the Shandong Provincial Key Research and Development Program (Major Scientific and Technological Innovation Project, nos. 2021CXGC010506 and 2019JZZY011007), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 82261160396), and the Taishan Scholars Program of Shandong Province (no. tsqn202306344).

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data