Screening test accuracy of portable devices that can be used to perform colposcopy for detecting CIN2+ in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Taghavi, Katayoun; Rohner, Eliane; Basu, Partha; Low, Nicola; Rutjes, Anne; Bohlius, Julia (2020). Screening test accuracy of portable devices that can be used to perform colposcopy for detecting CIN2+ in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC women's health, 20(1), p. 253. BioMed Central 10.1186/s12905-020-01121-3

Preview

Text Taghavi BMCWomensHealth 2020.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (2MB) | Preview

BACKGROUND

Portable devices that can be used to perform colposcopy may improve cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where access to colposcopy is limited. The objective of this study was to systematically review the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of these devices for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+).

METHODS

In accordance with our protocol (Prospero CRD42018104286), we searched Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials up to 9/2019. We included DTA studies, which investigated portable devices with moderate-to-high optical magnification (≥ 6×) for colposcopy, as described in the manual for Colposcopy and Treatment by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with a histopathological reference standard. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess study quality. We examined results for sensitivity and specificity in paired forest plots, stratified by stages in the clinical pathway. We pooled estimates of test accuracy for the index test, used as an add-on to other tests, using a bivariate random-effect model.

RESULTS

We screened 1737 references and assessed 239 full-text articles for eligibility. Five single-gate DTA studies, including 2693 women, met the inclusion criteria. Studies evaluated two devices (Gynocular™ and Pocket) at different stages of the screening pathway. In three studies, which used the index test in an add-on capacity in 1273 women, we found a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI 0.55-0.92) and specificity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.59-0.94). The main sources of bias were partial verification, incorporation and classification bias.

CONCLUSION

Few studies have evaluated portable devices able to perform colposcopy, so their accuracy for the detection of CIN2+ remains uncertain. Future studies should include patient-relevant and long-term outcomes, including missed cases, overtreatment, residual and recurrent disease. To meet the challenge of eliminating cervical cancer in LMIC, methods for visual assessment of the cervix need urgent redress.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

92 since deposited on 23 Nov 2020
29 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item