Improvement in adenoma detection rate by artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: Multicenter quasi-randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.2 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2025-02-26 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2521-5169
Ronja Maria Birgitta Lagström, Karoline Bendix Bräuner, Julia Bielik, Andreas Weinberger Rosen, Julie Gräs Crone, Ismail Gögenur, Mustafa Bulut
{"title":"Improvement in adenoma detection rate by artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: Multicenter quasi-randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Ronja Maria Birgitta Lagström, Karoline Bendix Bräuner, Julia Bielik, Andreas Weinberger Rosen, Julie Gräs Crone, Ismail Gögenur, Mustafa Bulut","doi":"10.1055/a-2521-5169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key performance measure with variability among endoscopists. Artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopy could reduce this variability and has shown to improve ADR. This study assessed the impact of AI on ADR among Danish endoscopists of varying experience levels.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective, quasi-randomized, controlled, multicenter trial involving patients aged 18 and older undergoing screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopy at four centers. Participants were assigned to AI-assisted colonoscopy (GI Genius, Medtronic) or conventional colonoscopy. Endoscopists were classified as experts (> 1000 colonoscopies) or non-experts (≤ 1000 colonoscopies). The primary outcome was ADR. We performed a subgroup analysis stratified on endoscopist experience and a subset analysis of the screening population.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 795 patients were analyzed: 400 in the AI group and 395 in the control group. The AI group demonstrated a significantly higher ADR than the control group (59.1% vs. 46.6%, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The increase was significant among experts (59.9% vs. 47.3%, <i>P</i> < 0.002) but not among non-experts. AI assistance significantly improved ADR (74.4% vs. 58.1%, <i>P</i> = 0.003) in screening colonoscopies. Polyp detection rate (PDR) was also higher in the AI group (69.8% vs. 56.2%, <i>P</i> < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the non-neoplastic resection rate (NNRR) (15.1% vs. 17.1%, <i>P</i> = 0.542).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI-assisted colonoscopy significantly increased ADR by 12.5% overall, with a notable 16.3% increase in the screening population. The unchanged NNRR indicates that the higher PDR was due to increased ADR, not unnecessary resections.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"13 ","pages":"a25215169"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11866038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2521-5169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and study aims: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key performance measure with variability among endoscopists. Artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopy could reduce this variability and has shown to improve ADR. This study assessed the impact of AI on ADR among Danish endoscopists of varying experience levels.

Patients and methods: We conducted a prospective, quasi-randomized, controlled, multicenter trial involving patients aged 18 and older undergoing screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopy at four centers. Participants were assigned to AI-assisted colonoscopy (GI Genius, Medtronic) or conventional colonoscopy. Endoscopists were classified as experts (> 1000 colonoscopies) or non-experts (≤ 1000 colonoscopies). The primary outcome was ADR. We performed a subgroup analysis stratified on endoscopist experience and a subset analysis of the screening population.

Results: A total of 795 patients were analyzed: 400 in the AI group and 395 in the control group. The AI group demonstrated a significantly higher ADR than the control group (59.1% vs. 46.6%, P < 0.001). The increase was significant among experts (59.9% vs. 47.3%, P < 0.002) but not among non-experts. AI assistance significantly improved ADR (74.4% vs. 58.1%, P = 0.003) in screening colonoscopies. Polyp detection rate (PDR) was also higher in the AI group (69.8% vs. 56.2%, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the non-neoplastic resection rate (NNRR) (15.1% vs. 17.1%, P = 0.542).

Conclusions: AI-assisted colonoscopy significantly increased ADR by 12.5% overall, with a notable 16.3% increase in the screening population. The unchanged NNRR indicates that the higher PDR was due to increased ADR, not unnecessary resections.

人工智能辅助结肠镜检查提高腺瘤检出率:多中心准随机对照试验。
背景与研究目的:腺瘤检出率(ADR)是内镜医师考核的关键指标,但存在差异。结肠镜检查中的人工智能(AI)可以减少这种可变性,并已显示出改善不良反应的能力。本研究评估了不同经验水平的丹麦内窥镜医师使用人工智能对不良反应的影响。患者和方法:我们进行了一项前瞻性、准随机、对照、多中心试验,包括在四个中心接受筛查、监测和诊断性结肠镜检查的18岁及以上患者。参与者被分配到人工智能辅助结肠镜检查(GI Genius, Medtronic)或传统结肠镜检查。内窥镜医师分为专家(≤1000次)和非专家(≤1000次)。主要结局是ADR。我们根据内镜医师的经验进行了亚组分析,并对筛查人群进行了亚组分析。结果:共分析795例患者,其中AI组400例,对照组395例。AI组不良反应发生率明显高于对照组(59.1%比46.6%,P < 0.001)。在专家中(59.9% vs. 47.3%, P < 0.002),但在非专家中没有显著的增加。人工智能辅助显著改善结肠镜筛查的不良反应(74.4% vs. 58.1%, P = 0.003)。AI组息肉检出率(PDR)也高于AI组(69.8% vs. 56.2%, P < 0.001)。两组非肿瘤切除率(NNRR)差异无统计学意义(15.1% vs. 17.1%, P = 0.542)。结论:人工智能辅助结肠镜检查总体上显著增加了12.5%的不良反应,在筛查人群中显著增加了16.3%。不变的NNRR表明,较高的PDR是由于ADR增加,而不是不必要的切除。
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
Endoscopy International Open
Endoscopy International Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
3.80%
发文量
270
×
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