Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Capsule Endoscopy Versus Conventional Capsule Endoscopy for Detection of Small Bowel Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Arkadeep Dhali, Vincent Kipkorir, Rick Maity, Bahadar S Srichawla, Jyotirmoy Biswas, Roger B Rathna, Hareesha Rishab Bharadwaj, Ibsen Ongidi, Talha Chaudhry, Gisore Morara, Maryann Waithaka, Clinton Rugut, Miheso Lemashon, Isaac Cheruiyot, Daniel Ojuka, Sukanta Ray, Gopal Krishna Dhali
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Capsule Endoscopy Versus Conventional Capsule Endoscopy for Detection of Small Bowel Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Arkadeep Dhali, Vincent Kipkorir, Rick Maity, Bahadar S Srichawla, Jyotirmoy Biswas, Roger B Rathna, Hareesha Rishab Bharadwaj, Ibsen Ongidi, Talha Chaudhry, Gisore Morara, Maryann Waithaka, Clinton Rugut, Miheso Lemashon, Isaac Cheruiyot, Daniel Ojuka, Sukanta Ray, Gopal Krishna Dhali","doi":"10.1111/jgh.16931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Capsule endoscopy (CE) is a valuable tool used in the diagnosis of small intestinal lesions. The study aims to systematically review the literature and provide a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, and negative and positive predictive values of AI-assisted CE in the diagnosis of small bowel lesions in comparison to CE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Literature searches were performed through PubMed, SCOPUS, and EMBASE to identify studies eligible for inclusion. All publications up to 24 November 2024 were included. Original articles (including observational studies and randomized control trials), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case series reporting outcomes on AI-assisted CE in the diagnosis of small bowel lesions were included. The extracted data were pooled, and a meta-analysis was performed for the appropriate variables, considering the clinical and methodological heterogeneity among the included studies. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis v4.0 (Biostat Inc.) was used for the analysis of the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 studies were included in the present study. The mean age of participants across the studies was 54.3 years (SD 17.7), with 55.4% men and 44.6% women. The pooled accuracy for conventional CE was 0.966 (95% CI: 0.925-0.988), whereas for AI-assisted CE, it was 0.9185 (95% CI: 0.9138-0.9233). Conventional CE exhibited a pooled sensitivity of 0.860 (95% CI: 0.786-0.934) compared with AI-assisted CE at 0.9239 (95% CI: 0.8648-0.9870). The positive predictive value for conventional CE was 0.982 (95% CI: 0.976-0.987), whereas AI-assisted CE had a PPV of 0.8928 (95% CI: 0.7554-0.999). The pooled specificity for conventional CE was 0.998 (95% CI: 0.996-0.999) compared with 0.5367 (95% CI: 0.5244-0.5492) for AI-assisted CE. Negative predictive values were higher in AI-assisted CE at 0.9425 (95% CI: 0.9389-0.9462) versus 0.760 (95% CI: 0.577-0.943) for conventional CE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AI-assisted CE displays superior diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and positive predictive values albeit the lower pooled specificity in comparison with conventional CE. Its use would ensure accurate detection of small bowel lesions and further enhance their management.</p>","PeriodicalId":15877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.16931","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Capsule endoscopy (CE) is a valuable tool used in the diagnosis of small intestinal lesions. The study aims to systematically review the literature and provide a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, and negative and positive predictive values of AI-assisted CE in the diagnosis of small bowel lesions in comparison to CE.

Methods: Literature searches were performed through PubMed, SCOPUS, and EMBASE to identify studies eligible for inclusion. All publications up to 24 November 2024 were included. Original articles (including observational studies and randomized control trials), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case series reporting outcomes on AI-assisted CE in the diagnosis of small bowel lesions were included. The extracted data were pooled, and a meta-analysis was performed for the appropriate variables, considering the clinical and methodological heterogeneity among the included studies. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis v4.0 (Biostat Inc.) was used for the analysis of the data.

Results: A total of 14 studies were included in the present study. The mean age of participants across the studies was 54.3 years (SD 17.7), with 55.4% men and 44.6% women. The pooled accuracy for conventional CE was 0.966 (95% CI: 0.925-0.988), whereas for AI-assisted CE, it was 0.9185 (95% CI: 0.9138-0.9233). Conventional CE exhibited a pooled sensitivity of 0.860 (95% CI: 0.786-0.934) compared with AI-assisted CE at 0.9239 (95% CI: 0.8648-0.9870). The positive predictive value for conventional CE was 0.982 (95% CI: 0.976-0.987), whereas AI-assisted CE had a PPV of 0.8928 (95% CI: 0.7554-0.999). The pooled specificity for conventional CE was 0.998 (95% CI: 0.996-0.999) compared with 0.5367 (95% CI: 0.5244-0.5492) for AI-assisted CE. Negative predictive values were higher in AI-assisted CE at 0.9425 (95% CI: 0.9389-0.9462) versus 0.760 (95% CI: 0.577-0.943) for conventional CE.

Conclusion: AI-assisted CE displays superior diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and positive predictive values albeit the lower pooled specificity in comparison with conventional CE. Its use would ensure accurate detection of small bowel lesions and further enhance their management.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
326
审稿时长
2.3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology is produced 12 times per year and publishes peer-reviewed original papers, reviews and editorials concerned with clinical practice and research in the fields of hepatology, gastroenterology and endoscopy. Papers cover the medical, radiological, pathological, biochemical, physiological and historical aspects of the subject areas. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees expert in the field of the submitted paper.
×
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