The impact of artificial intelligence on the adenoma detection rate : Comparison between experienced, intermediate and trainee endoscopists' adenoma detection rate.
Sebastian Bernhofer, Julian Prosenz, David Venturi, Andreas Maieron
{"title":"The impact of artificial intelligence on the adenoma detection rate : Comparison between experienced, intermediate and trainee endoscopists' adenoma detection rate.","authors":"Sebastian Bernhofer, Julian Prosenz, David Venturi, Andreas Maieron","doi":"10.1007/s00508-025-02561-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising tool to achieve a high adenoma detection rate (ADR). The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of a computer-aided detection (CADe) device on the ADRs of endoscopists with different levels of expertise.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were collected from patients who underwent colonoscopy with CADe within a 12-month period. Endoscopists were divided into three groups, a trainee group (< 500 colonoscopies), an intermediate group (500-1000 colonoscopies) and an expert group (> 2000 colonoscopies). Endoscopists with the same definition of experience without CADe support served as the control cohort. For the differences in ADR between the groups a 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) and odds ratios (OR) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study 335 patients (155 females, 177 males) with a mean age 62.1 years (SD ± 16.2 years) were included in the CADe cohort. In this cohort 508 polyps were resected. The ADRs for the groups and control groups (without CADe) were as follows: 42.9% (95% CI: 28.5-57.2%) and 21.5% (95% CI: 11.3-31.8%) in the trainee group, 41.3% (95% CI: 33.5-49.0%) and 36.8% (95% CI: 27.9-45.6%) in the intermediate group and 39.8% (95% CI: 30.9-48.8%) and 33.3% (95% CI: 26.3-40.4%) in the expert group. There were no significant differences among the CADe groups when trainees were compared to experts (p = 0.72, OR 1.13, 95% CI: 0.58-2.16) or when intermediate endoscopists were compared to experts (p = 0.81, OR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.65-1.74).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of AI appears to provide an opportunity to match the ADR-based quality of colonoscopy at an early stage of endoscopy training with experts.</p>","PeriodicalId":23861,"journal":{"name":"Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-025-02561-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising tool to achieve a high adenoma detection rate (ADR). The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of a computer-aided detection (CADe) device on the ADRs of endoscopists with different levels of expertise.
Methods: Data were collected from patients who underwent colonoscopy with CADe within a 12-month period. Endoscopists were divided into three groups, a trainee group (< 500 colonoscopies), an intermediate group (500-1000 colonoscopies) and an expert group (> 2000 colonoscopies). Endoscopists with the same definition of experience without CADe support served as the control cohort. For the differences in ADR between the groups a 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) and odds ratios (OR) were calculated.
Results: In this study 335 patients (155 females, 177 males) with a mean age 62.1 years (SD ± 16.2 years) were included in the CADe cohort. In this cohort 508 polyps were resected. The ADRs for the groups and control groups (without CADe) were as follows: 42.9% (95% CI: 28.5-57.2%) and 21.5% (95% CI: 11.3-31.8%) in the trainee group, 41.3% (95% CI: 33.5-49.0%) and 36.8% (95% CI: 27.9-45.6%) in the intermediate group and 39.8% (95% CI: 30.9-48.8%) and 33.3% (95% CI: 26.3-40.4%) in the expert group. There were no significant differences among the CADe groups when trainees were compared to experts (p = 0.72, OR 1.13, 95% CI: 0.58-2.16) or when intermediate endoscopists were compared to experts (p = 0.81, OR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.65-1.74).
Conclusion: The use of AI appears to provide an opportunity to match the ADR-based quality of colonoscopy at an early stage of endoscopy training with experts.
期刊介绍:
The Wiener klinische Wochenschrift - The Central European Journal of Medicine - is an international scientific medical journal covering the entire spectrum of clinical medicine and related areas such as ethics in medicine, public health and the history of medicine. In addition to original articles, the Journal features editorials and leading articles on newly emerging topics, review articles, case reports and a broad range of special articles. Experimental material will be considered for publication if it is directly relevant to clinical medicine. The number of international contributions has been steadily increasing. Consequently, the international reputation of the journal has grown in the past several years. Founded in 1888, the Wiener klinische Wochenschrift - The Central European Journal of Medicine - is certainly one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world and takes pride in having been the first publisher of landmarks in medicine.