| Literature DB >> 33132644 |
Emanuele Sinagra1, Matteo Badalamenti2, Marcello Maida3, Marco Spadaccini2, Roberta Maselli2, Francesca Rossi4, Giuseppe Conoscenti4, Dario Raimondo4, Socrate Pallio5, Alessandro Repici2, Andrea Anderloni2.
Abstract
Colonoscopy remains the standard strategy for screening for colorectal cancer around the world due to its efficacy in both detecting adenomatous or pre-cancerous lesions and the capacity to remove them intra-procedurally. Computer-aided detection and diagnosis (CAD), thanks to the brand new developed innovations of artificial intelligence, and especially deep-learning techniques, leads to a promising solution to human biases in performance by guarantying decision support during colonoscopy. The application of CAD on real-time colonoscopy helps increasing the adenoma detection rate, and therefore contributes to reduce the incidence of interval cancers improving the effectiveness of colonoscopy screening on critical outcome such as colorectal cancer related mortality. Furthermore, a significant reduction in costs is also expected. In addition, the assistance of the machine will lead to a reduction of the examination time and therefore an optimization of the endoscopic schedule. The aim of this opinion review is to analyze the clinical applications of CAD and artificial intelligence in colonoscopy, as it is reported in literature, addressing evidence, limitations, and future prospects. ©The Author(s) 2020. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Adenoma detection rate; Artificial intelligence; Colonoscopy; Computer-aided detection and diagnosis; Endoscopy; Pathology
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33132644 PMCID: PMC7584058 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i39.5911
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastroenterol ISSN: 1007-9327 Impact factor: 5.742
Figure 1Interlacing of the main concept involved in the filed of artificial intelligence.
The overall adenoma detection rate of these studies was significantly higher while aided by computer aided detection systems
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Repici | Multicenter RCT | GI Genius | WL | 40, 40% |
| CADe | 54, 80% | |||
| Wang | Monocenter RCT | Endoscreener | WL | 20% |
| CADe | 29% | |||
| Wang | Monocenter RCT | Endoscreener | WL | 28% |
| CADe | 34, 10% | |||
| Gong | Monocenter RCT | ENDOANGEL | WL | 8, 20% |
| CADe | 16, 70% | |||
| Liu | Monocenter RCT | HenanTongyu | WL | 24% |
| CADe | 39, 20% |
WL: White light; RCT: Randomized clinical trial; CADe: Computer aided detection; ADR: Adenoma detection rate.
Computer-aided detection and diagnosis system can achieve the thresholds of preservation and incorporation of valuable endoscopic innovations for diminutive, non-neoplastic rectosigmoid polyps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Aihara | All polyps ( | AFE | Sensitivity: 94.2 % Specificity: 88.9% NPV: 85.2% | 2013 | Japan |
| Kuiper | < 10 mm polyps ( | WAVSTAT, WAVSTAT + HRE | Accuracy: 74.4% Accuracy + HRE: 79.2% NPV: 73.5% NPV + HRE: 73.9 % | 2015 | Netherlands |
| Rath | ≤ 5 mm polyps ( | WAVSTAT4 + LIFS | Accuracy: 84.7% Sensitivity: 81.8% Specificity: 85.2% NPV: 96.1% | 2016 | Germany |
| Kominami | All polyps ( | NBI | Concordance: 97.5% Accuracy: 93.2 % Sensitivity: 93% Specificity: 93.3% PPV: 93% NPV: 93.3% | 2016 | Japan |
| Mori | ≤ 5 mm polyps ( | EC-NBI-CAD EC-MB-CAD | Accuracy: 98.1% NPV EC-NBI-CAD:96.5% NPV EC-MB-CAD: 96.4% | 2018 | Japan |
NBI: Narrow band imaging; CAD: Computer-aided detection and diagnosis; NPV: Negative predictive value.