Accuracy of Visual Estimation for Measuring Colonic Polyp Size: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 8 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Abraham Z Cheloff, Leah Kim, Mark B Pochapin, Aasma Shaukat, Violeta Popov
{"title":"Accuracy of Visual Estimation for Measuring Colonic Polyp Size: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Abraham Z Cheloff, Leah Kim, Mark B Pochapin, Aasma Shaukat, Violeta Popov","doi":"10.14309/ajg.0000000000003391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Measurement of colorectal polyps is typically performed via visual estimation, which is prone to bias. Studies have evaluated the accuracy of visual estimation and utility of assistive tools, but results have been mixed. This study aims to clarify the accuracy of visual estimation as a measurement tool, and the benefits of artificial intelligence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE and Embase were searched through October 2024. Extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two authors. The primary outcome was the pooled absolute mean difference in size between visual estimation and control. Secondary outcomes included subgroup analysis of expert vs trainee status, accuracy of artificial intelligence, study origin (East vs. West), comparator type, definition of accuracy, polyp size, direction of estimation, and image type.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35 studies with 42,964 polyp measurements were included in our analysis. All studies were of high quality and there was no evidence of publication bias. The pooled absolute mean difference from comparator was 1.68mm (CI 1.21-2.15) with high variability explained by differences in the comparator, the direction of estimation, image type, and size of the polyp. Overall accuracy was 60% with high variability as well, with increased accuracy with video displayed over photos. Artificial intelligence improved accuracy with an odds ratio of 7.46.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Visual estimation is an inaccurate and imprecise way to measure colorectal polyps. Further research is needed to determine the impact on clinical outcomes related to colorectal cancer. Investment in new technology to aid in polyp measurement is an important next step.</p>","PeriodicalId":7608,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003391","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Measurement of colorectal polyps is typically performed via visual estimation, which is prone to bias. Studies have evaluated the accuracy of visual estimation and utility of assistive tools, but results have been mixed. This study aims to clarify the accuracy of visual estimation as a measurement tool, and the benefits of artificial intelligence.

Methods: MEDLINE and Embase were searched through October 2024. Extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two authors. The primary outcome was the pooled absolute mean difference in size between visual estimation and control. Secondary outcomes included subgroup analysis of expert vs trainee status, accuracy of artificial intelligence, study origin (East vs. West), comparator type, definition of accuracy, polyp size, direction of estimation, and image type.

Results: 35 studies with 42,964 polyp measurements were included in our analysis. All studies were of high quality and there was no evidence of publication bias. The pooled absolute mean difference from comparator was 1.68mm (CI 1.21-2.15) with high variability explained by differences in the comparator, the direction of estimation, image type, and size of the polyp. Overall accuracy was 60% with high variability as well, with increased accuracy with video displayed over photos. Artificial intelligence improved accuracy with an odds ratio of 7.46.

Conclusion: Visual estimation is an inaccurate and imprecise way to measure colorectal polyps. Further research is needed to determine the impact on clinical outcomes related to colorectal cancer. Investment in new technology to aid in polyp measurement is an important next step.

目测测量结肠息肉大小的准确性:系统回顾与元分析
背景:大肠息肉的测量通常通过目测进行,这很容易产生偏差。已有研究对目测的准确性和辅助工具的实用性进行了评估,但结果不一。本研究旨在阐明目测作为测量工具的准确性以及人工智能的优势:方法:检索了截至 2024 年 10 月的 MEDLINE 和 Embase。摘录和质量评估由两位作者独立完成。主要结果是视觉估算与对照之间的集合绝对平均尺寸差异。次要结果包括专家与实习生的亚组分析、人工智能的准确性、研究来源(东方与西方)、比较者类型、准确性定义、息肉大小、估计方向和图像类型:我们的分析共纳入了 35 项研究,42964 个息肉测量结果。所有研究的质量都很高,没有证据表明存在发表偏倚。与参照物的汇总绝对平均值差异为 1.68 毫米(CI 1.21-2.15),由于参照物、估算方向、图像类型和息肉大小不同,差异很大。总体准确率为 60%,变异性也很高,视频显示的准确率高于照片。人工智能提高了准确率,几率比为 7.46:目测是一种不准确、不精确的测量结直肠息肉的方法。需要进一步研究确定其对结肠直肠癌相关临床结果的影响。投资新技术以帮助测量息肉是下一步的重要工作。
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
American Journal of Gastroenterology
American Journal of Gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
458
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), The American Journal of Gastroenterology (AJG) stands as the foremost clinical journal in the fields of gastroenterology and hepatology. AJG offers practical and professional support to clinicians addressing the most prevalent gastroenterological disorders in patients.
×
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