Impact of AI-aided colonoscopy in clinical practice: a prospective randomised controlled trial.

IF 3.3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Johanna Schöler, Marko Alavanja, Thomas de Lange, Shunsuke Yamamoto, Per Hedenström, Jonas Varkey
{"title":"Impact of AI-aided colonoscopy in clinical practice: a prospective randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Johanna Schöler, Marko Alavanja, Thomas de Lange, Shunsuke Yamamoto, Per Hedenström, Jonas Varkey","doi":"10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a significant role in cancer-related mortality. Colonoscopy, combined with adenoma removal, has proven effective in reducing CRC incidence. However, suboptimal colonoscopy quality often leads to missed polyps. The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on adenoma and polyp detection rate (ADR, PDR) is yet to be established.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We conducted a randomised controlled trial at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Sweden. Patients underwent colonoscopy with or without the assistance of AI (AI-C or conventional colonoscopy (CC)). Examinations were performed with two different AI systems, that is, Fujifilm CADEye and Medtronic GI Genius. The primary outcome was ADR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 286 patients, 240 underwent analysis (average age: 66 years). The ADR was 42% for all patients, and no significant difference emerged between AI-C and CC groups (41% vs 43%). The overall PDR was 61%, with a trend towards higher PDR in the AI-C group. Subgroup analysis revealed higher detection rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL) with AI assistance (AI-C 22%, CC 11%, p=0.004). No difference was noticed in the detection of polyps or adenomas per colonoscopy. Examinations were most often performed by experienced endoscopists, 78% (n=86 AI-C, 100 CC).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Amidst the ongoing AI integration, ADR did not improve with AI. Particularly noteworthy is the enhanced detection rates for SSL by AI assistance, especially since they pose a risk for postcolonoscopy CRC. The integration of AI into standard colonoscopy practice warrants further investigation and the development of improved software might be necessary before enforcing its mandatory implementation.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT05178095.</p>","PeriodicalId":9235,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10870789/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a significant role in cancer-related mortality. Colonoscopy, combined with adenoma removal, has proven effective in reducing CRC incidence. However, suboptimal colonoscopy quality often leads to missed polyps. The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on adenoma and polyp detection rate (ADR, PDR) is yet to be established.

Design: We conducted a randomised controlled trial at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Sweden. Patients underwent colonoscopy with or without the assistance of AI (AI-C or conventional colonoscopy (CC)). Examinations were performed with two different AI systems, that is, Fujifilm CADEye and Medtronic GI Genius. The primary outcome was ADR.

Results: Among 286 patients, 240 underwent analysis (average age: 66 years). The ADR was 42% for all patients, and no significant difference emerged between AI-C and CC groups (41% vs 43%). The overall PDR was 61%, with a trend towards higher PDR in the AI-C group. Subgroup analysis revealed higher detection rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL) with AI assistance (AI-C 22%, CC 11%, p=0.004). No difference was noticed in the detection of polyps or adenomas per colonoscopy. Examinations were most often performed by experienced endoscopists, 78% (n=86 AI-C, 100 CC).

Conclusion: Amidst the ongoing AI integration, ADR did not improve with AI. Particularly noteworthy is the enhanced detection rates for SSL by AI assistance, especially since they pose a risk for postcolonoscopy CRC. The integration of AI into standard colonoscopy practice warrants further investigation and the development of improved software might be necessary before enforcing its mandatory implementation.

Trial registration number: NCT05178095.

人工智能辅助结肠镜检查在临床实践中的影响:前瞻性随机对照试验。
目的:结肠直肠癌(CRC)在癌症相关死亡率中占有重要地位。事实证明,结肠镜检查结合腺瘤切除术可有效降低 CRC 发病率。然而,结肠镜检查质量不达标往往会导致漏诊息肉。人工智能(AI)对腺瘤和息肉检出率(ADR、PDR)的影响尚未确定:设计:我们在瑞典 Sahlgrenska 大学医院进行了一项随机对照试验。患者在有人工智能辅助或无人工智能辅助的情况下接受结肠镜检查(AI-C 或传统结肠镜检查 (CC))。检查由两种不同的人工智能系统进行,即富士胶片 CADEye 和美敦力 GI Genius。主要结果是 ADR:在 286 名患者中,240 人接受了分析(平均年龄:66 岁)。所有患者的 ADR 为 42%,AI-C 组和 CC 组之间无明显差异(41% 对 43%)。总体 PDR 为 61%,AI-C 组的 PDR 呈上升趋势。亚组分析显示,在 AI 辅助下,无柄锯齿状病变(SSL)的检出率更高(AI-C 组 22%,CC 组 11%,P=0.004)。在每次结肠镜检查中,息肉或腺瘤的检出率没有差异。检查通常由经验丰富的内镜医师进行,占 78%(n=86 AI-C,100 CC):结论:在人工智能不断融合的过程中,ADR 并未随着人工智能的发展而改善。特别值得注意的是,人工智能辅助提高了 SSL 的检出率,尤其是因为 SSL 会带来结肠镜检查后患上 CRC 的风险。将人工智能整合到标准结肠镜检查实践中值得进一步研究,在强制实施前可能需要开发改进的软件:NCT05178095.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Open Gastroenterology
BMJ Open Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.20%
发文量
68
审稿时长
2 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open Gastroenterology is an online-only, peer-reviewed, open access gastroenterology journal, dedicated to publishing high-quality medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas of gastroenterology. It is the open access companion journal of Gut and is co-owned by the British Society of Gastroenterology. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信