Abstract

Figures and tables

Table I..

Year of publication First author Country Manufacturer No. of subjects and location Subject setting Aim of study Sensitivity % Specificity %
2019 Goncalves et al. 1 Germany CellVizio, France Vocal folds 4 benign vs. 3 SCC Diagnostic assessment and interobserver agreement 91.4-96.6 100
2014 Nathan et al. 3 USA CellVizio, France Oral 12 leukoplakia vs. 9 SCC Diagnostic assessment a 85.7 100
2016 Moore et al. 4 USA CellVizio, France Oral 6 non-dysplasia vs. 7 dysplasia vs. 11 SCC Interobserver agreement NA NA
2016 Linxweiler et al. 5 Germany CellVizio, France HN 50 normal vs. 135 SCC Interobserver agreement b NA NA
2016 Oetter et al. 6 Germany CellVizio, France Oral 45 normal 50 SCC Diagnostic assessment and interobserver agreement 95.3 88.9
2016 Dittberner et al. 7 Germany CellVizio, France Oral, oropharynx, others Self control of 12 normal margins and SCC Automated Diagnostic assessment 85.0 72.0
2017 Aubreville et al. 8 Germany CellVizio, France oral Self control of 12 normal margins and SCC Automated Diagnostic assessment 86.6 90.0
2017 Englhard et al. 9 Germany CellVizio, France HN 5 normal vs. 11 SCC EGFR/EpCAM-targeted micro-imaging NA NA
2019 Watermann et al. 10 Germany Optiscan, Australia NA Gingiva normal vs. Oropharynx SCC EGFR nanoparticles-targeted micro-imaging NA NA
Summary of the English-language literature of confocal laser endomicroscopy for diagnostic assessment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (SCC).