人工智能内窥镜预测幽门螺杆菌感染:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Helicobacter Pub Date : 2025-03-21 DOI:10.1111/hel.70026
Yiwen Jiang, Hengxu Yan, Jiatong Cui, Kaiqiang Yang, Yue An
{"title":"人工智能内窥镜预测幽门螺杆菌感染:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yiwen Jiang,&nbsp;Hengxu Yan,&nbsp;Jiatong Cui,&nbsp;Kaiqiang Yang,&nbsp;Yue An","doi":"10.1111/hel.70026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>This meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI) based on endoscopy for detecting <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> (<i>H. pylori</i>) infection.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published up to January 10, 2025. The selected studies focused on the diagnostic accuracy of AI in detecting <i>H. pylori</i>. A bivariate random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, both presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study heterogeneity was assessed using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of 604 studies identified, 16 studies (25,002 images or patients) were included. For the internal validation set, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for detecting <i>H. pylori</i> were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84–0.95), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.94), and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94–0.97), respectively. For the external validation set, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.95), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96–0.99). For junior clinicians, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.76 (95% CI: 0.66–0.83), 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70–0.80), and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77–0.84). For senior clinicians, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74–0.86), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86–0.91), and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90–0.94).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Endoscopy-based AI demonstrates higher diagnostic performance compared to both junior and senior endoscopists. However, the high heterogeneity among studies limits the strength of these findings, and further research with external validation datasets is necessary to confirm the results.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13223,"journal":{"name":"Helicobacter","volume":"30 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopy for Predicting Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Yiwen Jiang,&nbsp;Hengxu Yan,&nbsp;Jiatong Cui,&nbsp;Kaiqiang Yang,&nbsp;Yue An\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hel.70026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>This meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI) based on endoscopy for detecting <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> (<i>H. pylori</i>) infection.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published up to January 10, 2025. The selected studies focused on the diagnostic accuracy of AI in detecting <i>H. pylori</i>. A bivariate random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, both presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study heterogeneity was assessed using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of 604 studies identified, 16 studies (25,002 images or patients) were included. For the internal validation set, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for detecting <i>H. pylori</i> were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84–0.95), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.94), and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94–0.97), respectively. For the external validation set, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.95), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96–0.99). For junior clinicians, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.76 (95% CI: 0.66–0.83), 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70–0.80), and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77–0.84). For senior clinicians, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74–0.86), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86–0.91), and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90–0.94).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Endoscopy-based AI demonstrates higher diagnostic performance compared to both junior and senior endoscopists. However, the high heterogeneity among studies limits the strength of these findings, and further research with external validation datasets is necessary to confirm the results.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Helicobacter\",\"volume\":\"30 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Helicobacter\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hel.70026\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Helicobacter","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hel.70026","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

目的:本荟萃分析旨在评估基于内窥镜的人工智能(AI)检测幽门螺杆菌(H. pylori)感染的诊断性能。方法:在PubMed、Embase和Web of Science上进行全面的文献检索,以确定截至2025年1月10日发表的相关研究。所选研究的重点是人工智能检测幽门螺杆菌的诊断准确性。采用双变量随机效应模型计算合并敏感性和特异性,均有95%可信区间(ci)。采用I2统计量评估研究异质性。结果:在确定的604项研究中,包括16项研究(25002张图像或患者)。对于内部验证集,检测幽门螺杆菌的总灵敏度、特异性和曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.95)、0.91 (95% CI: 0.86-0.94)和0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97)。对于外部验证集,合并敏感性、特异性和AUC分别为0.91 (95% CI: 0.86-0.95)、0.94 (95% CI: 0.90-0.97)和0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99)。对于初级临床医生,合并敏感性、特异性和AUC分别为0.76 (95% CI: 0.66-0.83)、0.75 (95% CI: 0.70-0.80)和0.81 (95% CI: 0.77-0.84)。对于资深临床医生,合并敏感性、特异性和AUC分别为0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.86)、0.89 (95% CI: 0.86-0.91)和0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94)。结论:与初级和高级内窥镜医师相比,基于内窥镜的人工智能具有更高的诊断性能。然而,研究之间的高度异质性限制了这些发现的强度,需要进一步的外部验证数据集的研究来证实结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopy for Predicting Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI) based on endoscopy for detecting Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published up to January 10, 2025. The selected studies focused on the diagnostic accuracy of AI in detecting H. pylori. A bivariate random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, both presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

Results

Of 604 studies identified, 16 studies (25,002 images or patients) were included. For the internal validation set, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for detecting H. pylori were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84–0.95), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.94), and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94–0.97), respectively. For the external validation set, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.95), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96–0.99). For junior clinicians, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.76 (95% CI: 0.66–0.83), 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70–0.80), and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77–0.84). For senior clinicians, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74–0.86), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86–0.91), and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90–0.94).

Conclusions

Endoscopy-based AI demonstrates higher diagnostic performance compared to both junior and senior endoscopists. However, the high heterogeneity among studies limits the strength of these findings, and further research with external validation datasets is necessary to confirm the results.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Helicobacter
Helicobacter 医学-微生物学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
76
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Helicobacter is edited by Professor David Y Graham. The editorial and peer review process is an independent process. Whenever there is a conflict of interest, the editor and editorial board will declare their interests and affiliations. Helicobacter recognises the critical role that has been established for Helicobacter pylori in peptic ulcer, gastric adenocarcinoma, and primary gastric lymphoma. As new helicobacter species are now regularly being discovered, Helicobacter covers the entire range of helicobacter research, increasing communication among the fields of gastroenterology; microbiology; vaccine development; laboratory animal science.
×
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