A Video-Based Artificial Intelligence Platform for Measuring Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Duration and Suggesting Real-Time Landmark Documentation.

IF 2.9 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2026-10-13 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2965-6499
Zohar Levi, Shani Brosh, Manor Shpriz, Ziv Varsano, Daniel Khodyrker, Dotan Asselman, Sari Maril, Keren Hod, Hadar Edelman-Klapper, Sapir Eizenstein, Ian M Gralnek, Inbar Segol, Naim Abu-Freha
{"title":"A Video-Based Artificial Intelligence Platform for Measuring Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Duration and Suggesting Real-Time Landmark Documentation.","authors":"Zohar Levi, Shani Brosh, Manor Shpriz, Ziv Varsano, Daniel Khodyrker, Dotan Asselman, Sari Maril, Keren Hod, Hadar Edelman-Klapper, Sapir Eizenstein, Ian M Gralnek, Inbar Segol, Naim Abu-Freha","doi":"10.1055/a-2965-6499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background and Study Aims</b> The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) sets key quality indicators for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), including a minimum procedural time of 7 min and photodocumentation of landmarks. We evaluated AI-derived procedural times, physician variations, and the impact of AI suggestions on landmark documentation rates. <b>Methods</b> This retrospective multicenter study included 78,336 EGDs performed by 213 physicians (01.01.2024-31.12.2025). A video-based AI platform (Theator Inc., Palo Alto, USA) measured procedural time, provided real-time landmark suggestions, and measured landmark documentation. Two blinded experts performed confirmatory validation of 500 procedures, with concordance defined as agreement within 2 s. <b>Results</b> Median procedural time was 3.30 min (IQR: 2.27-4.65). AI timestamps were concordant with expert review in 98.5% of cases (95% CI: 97.1-99.3%). Among 203 physicians performing at least 50 procedures, procedural time varied from 1.35 to 7.56 min (a 5.6-fold difference), with only 6.1% of procedures meeting the ESGE-recommended 7-min threshold. AI landmark suggestions reduced zero-landmark procedures by 42.6% (15.8 vs. 27.5%; <i>P</i> < 0.001), with improvements across all seven anatomical sites ( <i>P</i> < 0.001 for each). Physicians in the slowest total EGD time quintile had fewer normal examinations than those in the fastest quintile: 19.8 versus 31.7% ( <i>P</i> = 0.002), an association that persisted when physicians were restratified by biopsy-free procedural time. <b>Conclusions</b> Video-based AI accurately measured EGD procedure times and improved landmark documentation rate with AI-generated suggestions. A median procedural time of 3.3 min reveals a significant gap in quality standards. Automated, unattended measurement offers a scalable route to auditing upper endoscopy quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"14 ","pages":"a29656499"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13662674/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2965-6499","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Study Aims The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) sets key quality indicators for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), including a minimum procedural time of 7 min and photodocumentation of landmarks. We evaluated AI-derived procedural times, physician variations, and the impact of AI suggestions on landmark documentation rates. Methods This retrospective multicenter study included 78,336 EGDs performed by 213 physicians (01.01.2024-31.12.2025). A video-based AI platform (Theator Inc., Palo Alto, USA) measured procedural time, provided real-time landmark suggestions, and measured landmark documentation. Two blinded experts performed confirmatory validation of 500 procedures, with concordance defined as agreement within 2 s. Results Median procedural time was 3.30 min (IQR: 2.27-4.65). AI timestamps were concordant with expert review in 98.5% of cases (95% CI: 97.1-99.3%). Among 203 physicians performing at least 50 procedures, procedural time varied from 1.35 to 7.56 min (a 5.6-fold difference), with only 6.1% of procedures meeting the ESGE-recommended 7-min threshold. AI landmark suggestions reduced zero-landmark procedures by 42.6% (15.8 vs. 27.5%; P < 0.001), with improvements across all seven anatomical sites ( P < 0.001 for each). Physicians in the slowest total EGD time quintile had fewer normal examinations than those in the fastest quintile: 19.8 versus 31.7% ( P = 0.002), an association that persisted when physicians were restratified by biopsy-free procedural time. Conclusions Video-based AI accurately measured EGD procedure times and improved landmark documentation rate with AI-generated suggestions. A median procedural time of 3.3 min reveals a significant gap in quality standards. Automated, unattended measurement offers a scalable route to auditing upper endoscopy quality.

基于视频的人工智能平台测量食管胃十二指肠镜检查时间并建议实时里程碑文件。
背景与研究目的欧洲胃肠内镜学会(ESGE)制定了食管胃十二指肠镜检查(EGD)的关键质量指标,包括最低7分钟的手术时间和地标的照片记录。我们评估了人工智能衍生的程序时间、医生的变化以及人工智能建议对里程碑记录率的影响。方法回顾性多中心研究纳入213名医生(2024年1月1日- 2025年12月31日)实施的78,336例egd。基于视频的人工智能平台(Theator Inc., Palo Alto, USA)测量了程序时间,提供了实时地标建议,并测量了地标文档。两名盲法专家对500个程序进行了验证性验证,一致性定义为在2秒内达成一致。结果中位手术时间3.30 min (IQR: 2.27 ~ 4.65)。在98.5%的病例中,AI时间戳与专家评价一致(95% CI: 97.1-99.3%)。在执行至少50个手术的203名医生中,手术时间从1.35到7.56分钟不等(差异5.6倍),只有6.1%的手术符合esge推荐的7分钟阈值。人工智能地标建议减少了42.6%的零地标手术(15.8% vs. 27.5%, P < 0.001),所有七个解剖部位都有改善(P < 0.001)。EGD总时间最慢的五分位数的医生比最快的五分位数的医生进行的正常检查更少:19.8%对31.7% (P = 0.002),当医生被无活检手术时间重新调整时,这种关联仍然存在。结论基于视频的人工智能准确测量了EGD手术时间,并通过人工智能生成的建议提高了里程碑记录率。3.3分钟的中位手术时间显示了质量标准的显著差距。自动化,无人值守的测量提供了一个可扩展的途径来审计上内窥镜质量。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书