Table 3 Clinicopathologic features of detected neoplastic lesions (only the first procedure in each group)

From: Effect of computer aided detection system on esophageal neoplasm diagnosis in varied levels of endoscopists

Variable

Routine-first group (27 patients/29 lesions)

CAD-first group (53 patients/57 lesions)

Size, mm, n (%)

Ā Ā 

ā€ƒ10 mm

12 (41.38)

26 (45.61)

ā€ƒ>10–19 mm

11 (37.93)

19 (33.33)

ā€ƒ>19 mm

6 (20.69)

12 (21.05)

Location, n (%)

Ā Ā 

ā€ƒCe

1 (3.45)

5 (8.77)

ā€ƒUt

1 (3.45)

4 (7.02)

ā€ƒMt

9 (31.03)

15 (26.32)

ā€ƒLt

18 (62.07)

33 (57.89)

ā€ƒAe

0 (0)

0 (0)

Morphology, n (%)

Ā Ā 

ā€ƒUnidentified

1 (3.45)

0 (0)

ā€ƒProtruded

14 (48.28)

13 (22.81)

ā€ƒFlat

5 (17.24)

18 (31.58)

ā€ƒDepressed

9 (31.03)

26 (45.61)

Pathological diagnosis, n (%)

Ā Ā 

ā€ƒLGIN

2 (6.90)

8 (14.04)

ā€ƒHGIN

10 (34.48)

25 (43.86)

ā€ƒSquamous carcinoma

17 (58.62)

23 (40.35)

ā€ƒAdenocarcinoma

0 (0)

1 (1.75)

  1. Data are n (%).
  2. CAD computer-aided detection, Ut upper thoracic esophagus, Mt middle thoracic esophagus, Lt lower thoracic esophagus, Ae abdominal esophagus, Ce cervical esophagus, LGIN low grade intraepithelial neoplasia, HGIN high grade intraepithelial neoplasia.