Detectability of colorectal neoplastic lesions using a novel endoscopic system with blue laser imaging: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Non-polypoid Colorectal Lesions Detection and False Positive Detection by Artificial Intelligence under Blue Laser Imaging and Linked Color Imaging

Objectives

Artificial intelligence (AI) with white light imaging (WLI) is not enough for detecting non-polypoid colorectal polyps and it still has high false positive rate (FPR). We developed AIs using blue laser imaging (BLI) and linked color imaging (LCI) to detect them with specific learning sets (LS).

Methods

The contents of LS were as follows, LS (WLI): 1991 WLI images of lesion of 2-10 mm, LS (IEE): 5920 WLI, BLI, and LCI images of non-polypoid and small lesions of 2-20 mm. LS (IEE) was extracted from videos and included both in-focus and out-of-focus images. We designed three AIs as follows: AI (WLI) finetuned by LS (WLI), AI (IEE) finetuned by LS (WLI)+LS (IEE), and AI (HQ) finetuned by LS (WLI)+LS (IEE) only with images in focus. Polyp detection using a test set of WLI, BLI, and LCI videos of 100 non-polypoid or non-reddish lesions of 2-20 mm and FPR using movies of 15 total colonoscopy were analyzed, compared to 2 experts and 2 trainees.

Results

The sensitivity for LCI in AI (IEE) (83%) was compared to that for WLI in AI (IEE) (76%: p=0.02), WLI in AI (WLI) (57%: p<0.01), BLI in AI (IEE) (78%: p=0.14), and LCI in trainees (74%: p<0.01). The sensitivity for LCI in AI (IEE) (83%) was significantly higher than that in AI (HQ) (78%: p<0.01). The FPR for LCI (6.5%) in AI (IEE) were significantly lower than that in AI (HQ) (17.3%: p<0.01).

Conclusions

AI finetuned by appropriate LS detected non-reddish and non-polypoid polyps under LCI.

Linked color imaging improves colorectal lesion detection especially for low performance endoscopists: An international trial in Asia

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Linked color imaging (LCI) is an image-enhanced endoscopy technique that accentuates the color difference between red and white, potentially improving the adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, it remains unclear whether LCI performance in detecting colorectal lesions differs based on endoscopists' experience levels. We aimed to evaluate the differences in LCI efficacy based on the experience levels of endoscopists by conducting an exploratory analysis.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis of an international randomized controlled trial comparing the detection of adenoma and other lesions using colonoscopy with LCI and high-definition white light imaging (WLI), we included patients from 11 institutions across four countries/regions: Japan, Thailand, Taiwan, and Singapore. We retrospectively reviewed differences in the lesion detection of LCI according to endoscopists' colonoscopy history or ADR.

RESULTS

We included 1692 and 1138 patients who underwent colonoscopies performed by 54 experts (experience of ≥ 5000 colonoscopies) and by 43 non-experts (experience of < 5000 colonoscopies), respectively. Both expert and non-expert groups showed a significant improvement in ADR with LCI compared to WLI (expert, 61.7% vs 46.4%; P < 0.001; non-expert, 56.6% vs 46.4%; P < 0.001). LCI had no effect on sessile serrated lesion detection rate in non-experts (3.1% vs 2.5%; P = 0.518). LCI significantly improved detection rates in endoscopists with relatively low detection performance, defined as an ADR < 50%.

CONCLUSIONS

This exploratory study analyzed data from a previous trial and revealed that LCI is useful for both experts and non-experts and is even more beneficial for endoscopists with relatively low detection performance using WLI.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs in Latin America: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with increasing incidence and mortality in Latin America. CRC screening programs can reduce disease burden, but information on screening programs in Latin America is limited.

Objective

To describe characteristics (eg, type of program, uptake, neoplastic yield) of CRC screening programs in Latin America.

Data Sources

PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, LILACS, and SciELO were searched from inception to February 2023. Relevant references from bibliographies, conference proceedings, and gray literature were considered. The search strategy included English, Spanish, and Portuguese terms.

Study Selection

Included were studies of CRC screening programs in Latin America using fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy as the primary screening method. Four reviewers independently assessed study eligibility based on titles, with review of abstracts and full texts as needed.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Guidelines from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were followed for data abstraction and quality assessment. Descriptive information was extracted, and data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Main outcomes and Measures

Program performance indicators included rates of participation and FIT positivity, adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), CRC detection rate, and colonoscopy quality indicators.

Results

There were 17 studies included from upper middle-income and high-income countries in Latin America with a total of 123 929 participants. Thirteen studies used FIT as the initial screening method, whereas 4 used screening colonoscopy. The participation rate in FIT-based programs was 85.8% (95% CI, 78.5%-91.4%). FIT positivity rates were 15.2% (95% CI, 9.6%-21.8%) for the 50-ng/mL threshold and 9.7% (95% CI, 6.8%-13.0%) for the 100-ng/mL threshold. For FIT-based studies, the pooled ADR was 39.0% (95% CI, 29.3%-49.2%) and CRC detection rate was 4.9% (95% CI, 2.6%-7.9%); for screening colonoscopy-based studies, the pooled ADR was 19.9% (95% CI, 15.5%-24.8%) and CRC detection rate was 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-0.8%).

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that CRC screening in upper middle-income countries in Latin America is feasible, detecting rates of neoplasia comparable with those of high-income regions. Population-based screening programs should be developed or enhanced in these settings. There is a knowledge gap regarding feasibility and yield of screening programs in lower middle-income countries.

Impact of an artificial intelligence-aided endoscopic diagnosis system on improving endoscopy quality for trainees in colonoscopy: Prospective, randomized, multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to evaluate whether the use of CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) for colonoscopy improves colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees.

METHODS

The patients in this multicenter randomized controlled trial were divided into Group A (observation using CAD EYE) and Group B (standard observation). Six trainees performed colonoscopies using a back-to-back method in pairs with gastroenterology experts. The primary end-point was the trainees' adenoma detection rate (ADR), and the secondary end-points were the trainees' adenoma miss rate (AMR) and Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) tool scores. Each trainee's learning curve was evaluated using a cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart.

RESULTS

We analyzed data for 231 patients (Group A, n = 113; Group B, n = 118). The ADR was not significantly different between the two groups. Group A had a significantly lower AMR (25.6% vs. 38.6%, P = 0.033) and number of missed adenomas per patient (0.5 vs. 0.9, P = 0.004) than Group B. Group A also had significantly higher ACE tool scores for pathology identification (2.26 vs. 2.07, P = 0.030) and interpretation and identification of pathology location (2.18 vs. 2.00, P = 0.038). For the CUSUM learning curve, Group A showed a trend toward a lower number of cases of missed multiple adenomas by the six trainees.

CONCLUSION

CAD EYE did not improve ADR but decreased the AMR and improved the ability to accurately locate and identify colorectal adenomas. CAD EYE can be assumed to be beneficial for improving colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000044031).

Blue-light imaging or narrow-band imaging for proximal colonic lesions: a prospective randomized tandem colonoscopy study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Blue-light imaging (BLI) is a new image-enhanced endoscopy with a wavelength filter similar to narrow-band imaging (NBI). We compared the 2 with white-light imaging (WLI) on proximal colonic lesion detection and miss rates.

METHODS

In this 3-arm prospective randomized study with tandem examination of the proximal colon, we enrolled patients aged ≥40 years. Eligible patients were randomized in 1:1:1 ratio to receive BLI, NBI, or WLI during the first withdrawal from the proximal colon. The second withdrawal was performed using WLI in all patients. Primary outcomes were proximal polyp (pPDRs) and adenoma (pADRs) detection rates. Secondary outcomes were miss rates of proximal lesions found on tandem examination.

RESULTS

Of 901 patients included (mean age, 64.7 years; 52.9% men), 48.1% underwent colonoscopy for screening or surveillance. The corresponding pPDRs of the BLI, NBI, and WLI groups were 45.8%, 41.6, and 36.6%, whereas the corresponding pADRs were 36.6%, 33.8%, and 28.3%. There was a significant difference in pPDR and pADR between BLI and WLI groups (difference, 9.2% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 3.3-16.9] and 8.3% [95% CI, 2.7-15.9]) and between NBI and WLI groups (difference, 5.0% [95% CI, 1.4-12.9] and 5.6% [95% CI, 2.1-13.3]). Proximal adenoma miss rates were significantly lower with BLI (19.4%) than with WLI (27.4%; difference, -8.0%; 95% CI, -15.8 to -.1) but not between NBI (27.2%) and WLI.

CONCLUSIONS

Both BLI and NBI were superior to WLI on detecting proximal colonic lesions, but only BLI had lower proximal adenoma miss rates than WLI. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03696992.).

Comparison of LED and LASER Colonoscopy About Linked Color Imaging and Blue Laser/Light Imaging of Colorectal Tumors in a Multinational Study

INTRODUCTION

In light-emitting diode (LED) and LASER colonoscopy, linked color imaging (LCI) and blue light/laser imaging (BLI) are used for lesion detection and characterization worldwide. We analyzed the difference of LCI and BLI images of colorectal lesions between LED and LASER in a multinational study.

METHODS

We prospectively observed lesions with white light imaging (WLI), LCI, and BLI using both LED and LASER colonoscopies from January 2020 to August 2021. Images were graded by 27 endoscopists from nine countries using the polyp visibility score: 4 (excellent), 3 (good), 2 (fair), and 1 (poor) and the comparison score (LED better/similar/LASER better) for WLI/LCI/BLI images of each lesion.

RESULTS

Finally, 32 lesions (polyp size: 20.0 ± 15.2 mm) including 9 serrated lesions, 13 adenomas, and 10 T1 cancers were evaluated. The polyp visibility scores of LCI/WLI for international and Japan-expert endoscopists were 3.17 ± 0.73/3.17 ± 0.79 (p = 0.92) and 3.34 ± 0.78/2.84 ± 1.22 (p < 0.01) for LED and 3.30 ± 0.71/3.12 ± 0.77 (p < 0.01) and 3.31 ± 0.82/2.78 ± 1.23 (p < 0.01) for LASER. Regarding the comparison of lesion visibility about between LED and LASER colonoscopy in international endoscopists, a significant difference was achieved not for WLI, but for LCI. The rates of LED better/similar/LASER better for brightness under WLI were 54.5%/31.6%/13.9% (International) and 75.0%/21.9%/3.1% (Japan expert). Those under LCI were 39.2%/35.4%/25.3% (International) and 31.3%/53.1%/15.6% (Japan expert). There were no significant differences in the diagnostic accuracy and the comparison score of BLI images between LED and LASER.

CONCLUSIONS

The differences of lesion visibility for WLI/LCI/BLI between LED and LASER in international endoscopists could be compared to those in Japanese endoscopists.

Detecting colorectal lesions with image-enhanced endoscopy: an updated review from clinical trials

Colonoscopy plays an important role in reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer by detecting adenomas and other precancerous lesions. Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) increases lesion visibility by enhancing the microstructure, blood vessels, and mucosal surface color, resulting in the detection of colorectal lesions. In recent years, various IEE techniques have been used in clinical practice, each with its unique characteristics. Numerous studies have reported the effectiveness of IEE in the detection of colorectal lesions. IEEs can be divided into two broad categories according to the nature of the image: images constructed using narrowband wavelength light, such as narrowband imaging and blue laser imaging/blue light imaging, or color images based on white light, such as linked color imaging, texture and color enhancement imaging, and i-scan. Conversely, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, such as computer-aided diagnosis systems, have recently been developed to assist endoscopists in detecting colorectal lesions during colonoscopy. To better understand the features of each IEE, this review presents the effectiveness of each type of IEE and their combination with AI for colorectal lesion detection by referencing the latest research data.

Current Status of Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Asian Countries: A Questionnaire Survey

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic and therapeutic methods for colorectal cancer (CRC) have advanced; however, they may be inaccessible worldwide, and their widespread use is challenging. This questionnaire survey investigates the current status of diagnosis and treatment of early-stage CRC in Asian countries.

METHODS

Responses to the questionnaire were obtained from 213 doctors at different institutions in 8 countries and regions. The questionnaire consisted of 39 questions on the following four topics: noninvasive diagnosis other than endoscopy (6 questions), diagnosis by magnification and image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) including artificial intelligence (AI) (10 questions), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), proper use among other therapeutic methods (11 questions), and pathologic diagnosis and surveillance (12 questions).

RESULTS

Although 101 of 213 respondents were affiliated with academic hospitals, there were disparities among countries and regions in the dissemination of advanced technologies, such as IEE, AI, and ESD. The NICE classification is widely used for the diagnosis of colorectal tumors using IEE, while the JNET classification with magnification was used in countries such as Japan (65/70, 92.9%) and China (16/22, 72.7%). Of the 211 respondents, 208 (98.6%) assumed that en bloc resection should be achieved for carcinomas, and 180 of 212 (84.9%) believed that ESD was the most suitable in cases with a diameter larger than 2 cm. However, colorectal ESD is not widespread in countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia.

CONCLUSION

The promotion of advanced technologies and education should be continual to enable more people to benefit from them.

Adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy: how can it be improved?

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of widespread colonoscopy screening programs has helped in decreasing the incidence of Colorectal Cancer (CRC). However, 'back-to-back' colonoscopies revealed relevant percentage of missed adenomas. Quality indicators were created to further homogenize detection performances and decrease the incidence of post-colonoscopy CRC. Among them, the Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR), defined as the percentage obtained by dividing the number of endoscopic procedures in which at least one adenoma was resected, by the total number of procedures, was found to be inversely associated with the risks of interval colorectal cancer, advanced-stage interval cancer, and fatal interval cancer.

AREAS COVERED

In this paper, we performed a comprehensive review of the literature focusing on promising new devices and technologies, which are meant to positively affect the endoscopist performance in detecting adenomas, therefore increasing ADR.

EXPERT OPINION

Considering the current knowledge, although several devices and technologies have been proposed with this intent, the recent implementation of AI ranked over all of the other strategies and it is likely to become the new standard within few years. However, the combination of different device/technologies need to be investigated in the future aiming at even further increasing of endoscopist detection performances.

Unlocking quality in endoscopic mucosal resection

A review of the development of the key performance metrics of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), learning from the experience of the establishment of widespread colonoscopy quality measurements. Potential future performance markers for both colonoscopy and EMR are also evaluated to ensure continued high quality performance is maintained with a focus service framework and predictors of patient outcome.

Optimizing adenoma detection in screening-related colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Screening-related colonoscopy is a vital component of screening initiatives to both diagnose and prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), with prevention being reliant upon early and accurate detection of pre-malignant lesions. Several strategies, techniques, and interventions exist to optimize endoscopists' adenoma detection rates (ADR).

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review provides an overview of the importance of ADR and other colonoscopy quality indicators. It then summarizes the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of the following domains in terms of improving ADR: endoscopist factors, pre-procedural parameters, peri-procedural parameters, intra-procedural strategies and techniques, antispasmodics, distal attachment devices, enhanced colonoscopy technologies, enhanced optics, and artificial intelligence. These summaries are based on an electronic search of the databases Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane performed on December 12, 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

Given the prevalence and associated morbidity and mortality of CRC, the quality of screening-related colonoscopy quality is appropriately prioritized by patients, endoscopists, units, and payers alike. Endoscopists performing colonoscopy should be up to date regarding available strategies, techniques, and interventions to optimize their performance.

Variability in adenoma detection rate in control groups of randomized colonoscopy trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is still the main surrogate outcome parameter of screening colonoscopy, but most studies include mixed indications, and basic ADR is quite variable. We therefore looked at the control groups in randomized ADR trials using advanced imaging or mechanical methods to find out whether indications or other factors influence ADR levels.

METHODS

Patients in the control groups of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ADR increase using various methods were collected based on a systematic review; this control group had to use high-definition white-light endoscopy performed between 2008 and 2021. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool ADR in control groups and its 95% confidence interval (CI) according to clinical (indication and demographic), study setting (tandem/parallel, number of centers, sample size), and technical (type of intervention, withdrawal time) parameters. Interstudy heterogeneity was reported with the I² statistic. Multivariable mixed-effects meta-regression was performed for potentially relevant variables.

RESULTS

From 80 studies, 25,304 patients in the respective control groups were included. ADR in control arms varied between 8.2% and 68.1% with a high degree of heterogeneity (I² = 95.1%; random-effect pooled value, 37.5%; 95% CI, 34.6‒40.5). There was no difference in ADR levels between primary colonoscopy screening (12 RCTs, 15%) and mixed indications including screening/surveillance and diagnostic colonoscopy; however, fecal immunochemical testing as an indication for colonoscopy was an independent predictor of ADR (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4). Other well-known parameters were confirmed by our analysis such as age (OR, 1.038; 95% CI, 1.004-1.074), sex (male sex: OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), and withdrawal time (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1). The type of intervention (imaging vs mechanical) had no influence, but methodologic factors did: More recent year of publication and smaller sample size were associated with higher ADR.

CONCLUSIONS

A high level of variability was found in the level of ADR in the control groups of RCTs. With regards to indications, only fecal immunochemical test-based colonoscopy studies influenced basic ADR, and primary colonoscopy screening appeared to be similar to other indications. Standardization for variables related to clinical, methodologic, and technical parameters is required to achieve generalizability and reproducibility.

Comparison of Linked Color Imaging and White Light Imaging Colonoscopy for Detection of Colorectal Adenoma Requiring Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Linked color imaging (LCI) improves detection of colorectal neoplastic lesions during colonoscopy. However, polyps <5 mm in diameter often do not require resection, and the benefits of LCI are unclear for detection of colorectal polyps ≥5 mm that are indicated for endoscopic resection in clinical practice. This randomized controlled trial compared rates of detection of adenoma polyps, stratified by size, for LCI and white light imaging (WLI).

METHODS

We compared ADR (5 mm-) and PDR (5 mm-), which were defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma or polyp with a diameter of 5 mm or larger in the LCI and WLI groups. Moreover, we estimated ADR and PDR for diameters between 5 and 10 mm (ADR (5-9 mm), PDR (5-9 mm) ) and for diameters larger than 10 mm (ADR (10 mm-), PDR (10 mm-) ).

RESULTS

Data from 594 patients (LCI, n=305; WLI, n=289) were analyzed. ADR (5 mm-) and PDR (5 mm-) were significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (ADR (5 mm-): P=0.016, PDR (5 mm-): P=0.020). In the assessment of adenoma and polyp size, ADR (5-9 mm) and PDR (5-9 mm) were significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group, although no significant differences were seen in ADR (10 mm-) and PDR (10 mm-) between these groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Polyps ≥5 mm, which are indicated for endoscopic treatment, were more easily visualized with LCI mode than with WLI mode. The improvement in detection rate was obvious for polyps <10 mm, which are easier to miss.

Mucosal imaging in colon polyps: New advances and what the future may hold

An expanding range of advanced mucosal imaging technologies have been developed with the goal of improving the detection and characterization of lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. Many technologies have targeted colorectal neoplasia given the potential for intervention prior to the development of invasive cancer in the setting of widespread surveillance programs. Improvement in adenoma detection reduces miss rates and prevents interval cancer development. Advanced imaging technologies aim to enhance detection without significantly increasing procedural time. Accurate polyp characterisation guides resection techniques for larger polyps, as well as providing the platform for the “resect and discard” and “do not resect” strategies for small and diminutive polyps. This review aims to collate and summarise the evidence regarding these technologies to guide colonoscopic practice in both interventional and non-interventional endoscopists.

Updates in narrow-band imaging for colorectal polyps: Narrow-band imaging generations, detection, diagnosis, and artificial intelligence

Narrow-band imaging (NBI) is an optical digital enhancement method that allows the observation of vascular and surface structures of colorectal lesions. Its usefulness in the detection and diagnosis of colorectal polyps has been demonstrated in several clinical trials and the diagnostic algorithms have been simplified after the establishment of endoscopic classifications such as the Japan NBI Expert Team classification. However, there were issues including lack of brightness in the earlier models, poor visibility under insufficient bowel preparation, and the incompatibility of magnifying endoscopes in certain endoscopic platforms, which had impeded NBI from becoming standardized globally. Nonetheless, NBI continued its evolution and the newest endoscopic platform launched in 2020 offers significantly brighter and detailed images. Enhanced visualization is expected to improve the detection of polyps while universal compatibility across all scopes including magnifying endoscopy will promote the global standardization of magnifying diagnosis. Therefore, knowledge related to magnifying colonoscopy will become essential as magnification becomes standardly equipped in future models, although the advent of computer-aided diagnosis and detection may greatly assist endoscopists to ensure quality of practice. Given that most endoscopic departments will be using both old and new models, it is important to understand how each generation of endoscopic platforms differ from each other. We reviewed the advances in the endoscopic platforms, artificial intelligence, and evidence related to NBI essential for the next generation of endoscopic practice.

Images of laser and light-emitting diode colonoscopy for comparing large colorectal lesion visibility with linked color imaging and white-light imaging

OBJECTIVES

In light-emitting diode (LED) and laser colonoscopy, linked color imaging (LCI) superiority to white-light imaging (WLI) for polyp detection is shown separately. We analyzed the noninferiority of LCI between LED and laser colonoscopy and that of WLI (LECOL study).

METHODS

We prospectively collected nonpolypoid lesions with WLI and LCI using LED and laser colonoscopy from January 2021 to August 2021. All images were evaluated randomly by 12 endoscopists (six nonexperts and six experts in three institutions) using the polyp visibility score: 4, excellent; 3, good; 2, fair; and 1, poor. The comparison score (LED better/similar/laser better) for redness and brightness was evaluated for WLI and LCI pictures of each lesion.

RESULTS

Finally, 63 nonpolypoid lesions were evaluated, and the mean polyp size was 24.5 ± 13.4 mm. Histopathology revealed 13 serrated lesions and 50 adenomatous/cancerous lesions. The mean polyp visibility scores of LCI pictures were significantly higher than those of WLI in the LED (3.35 ± 0.85 vs. 3.08 ± 0.91, P < 0.001) and the laser (3.40 ± 1.71 vs. 3.05 ± 0.97, P < 0.001) group, and the noninferiority of LCI pictures between LED and laser was significant (P < 0.001). The comparison scores revealed that the evaluation of redness and brightness (LED better/similar/laser better) were 26.8%/40.1%/33.1% and 43.5%/43.5%/13.0% for LCI pictures (P < 0.001) and 20.6%/44.3%/35.1% and 60.3%/31.7%/8.0% for WLI pictures (P < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The noninferiority of polyp visibility with WLI and LCI in LED and laser colonoscopy was shown. WLI and LCI of LED tended to be brighter and less reddish than those of laser.

Key factors for improving adenoma detection rate

INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy is a fundamental tool in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. Nevertheless, one-fourth of colorectal neoplasms are still missed during colonoscopy, potentially being the main reason for post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is currently known as the best quality indicator correlating with PCCRC incidence.

AREAS COVERED

We performed a literature review in order to summarize evidences investigating key factors affecting ADR: endoscopists education and training, patient management, endoscopic techniques, improved navigation (exposition defect), and enhanced lesions recognition (vision defect) were considered.

EXPERT OPINION

'Traditional' factors, such as split dose bowel preparation, adequate withdrawal time, and right colon second view, held a significant impact on ADR. Several devices and technologies have been developed to promote high-quality colonoscopy, however artificial intelligence may be considered the most promising tool for ADR improvement, provided that endoscopists education and recording are guaranteed.

Sessile serrated lesions: Clinicopathological characteristics, endoscopic diagnosis, and management

The 2019 World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumours of the Digestive System (5th edition) introduced the term "sessile serrated lesion" (SSL) to replace the term "sessile serrated adenoma/polyp" (SSA/P). SSLs are early precursor lesions in the serrated neoplasia pathway that result in colorectal carcinomas with BRAF mutations, methylation for DNA repair genes, a CpG island methylator phenotype, and high levels of microsatellite instability. Some of these lesions can rapidly become dysplastic or invasive carcinomas that exhibit high lymphatic invasion and lymph node metastasis potential. The 2019 WHO classification noted that dysplasia arising in an SSL most likely is an advanced polyp, regardless of the morphologic grade of the dysplasia. Detecting SSLs with or without dysplasia is critical; however, detection of SSLs is challenging, and their identification by endoscopists and pathologists is inconsistent. Furthermore, indications for their endoscopic treatment have not been established. Moreover, SSLs are considered to contribute to the development of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers. Herein, the clinicopathological and endoscopic characteristics of SSLs, including features determined using white light and image-enhanced endoscopy, therapeutic indications, therapeutic methods, and surveillance are reviewed based on the literature. This information may lead to more intensive research to improve detection, diagnosis, and rates of complete resection of these lesions and reduce post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer rates.

Efficacy of international web-based educational intervention in the detection of high-risk flat and depressed colorectal lesions higher (CATCH project) with a video: Randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Three subcategories of high-risk flat and depressed lesions (FDLs), laterally spreading tumors non-granular type (LST-NG), depressed lesions, and large sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), are highly attributable to post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (CRC). Efficient and organized educational programs on detecting high-risk FDLs are lacking. We aimed to explore whether a web-based educational intervention with training on FIND clues (fold deformation, intensive stool/mucus attachment, no vessel visibility, and demarcated reddish area) may improve the ability to detect high-risk FDLs.

METHODS

This was an international web-based randomized control trial that enrolled non-expert endoscopists in 13 Asian countries. The participants were randomized into either education or non-education group. All participants took the pre-test and post-test to read 60 endoscopic images (40 high-risk FDLs, five polypoid, 15 no lesions) and answered whether there was a lesion. Only the education group received a self-education program (video and training questions and answers) between the tests. The primary outcome was a detection rate of high-risk FDLs.

RESULTS

In total, 284 participants were randomized. After excluding non-responders, the final data analyses were based on 139 participants in the education group and 130 in the non-education group. The detection rate of high-risk FDLs in the education group significantly improved by 14.7% (66.6-81.3%) compared with -0.8% (70.8-70.0%) in the non-education group. Similarly, the detection rate of LST-NG, depressed lesions, and large SSLs significantly increased only in the education group by 12.7%, 12.0%, and 21.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Short self-education focusing on detecting high-risk FDLs was effective for Asian non-expert endoscopists. (UMIN000042348).

Performance of Computer-Aided Detection and Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps Compares to That of Experienced Endoscopists

BACKGROUND

Differential diagnosis of neoplasms and non-neoplasms is crucial in ensuring appropriate and proper medical management for patients undergoing colonoscopy. Diagnostic ability can vary, depending on the colonoscopist's experience. To overcome this issue, artificial intelligence (AI) may be effective.

AIMS

To assess the performance of a computer-aided detection (CADe) and a computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) system for the detection and characterization of colorectal polyps by comparing their data with those of experienced endoscopists.

METHODS

This retrospective, still image-based validation study was conducted at three Japanese medical centers. A total of 579 white-light images (WLIs) and 605 linked color images (LCIs) were used for testing the CADe and 308 WLIs and 296 blue laser/light images (BLIs) for testing the CADx. The performances of the CADe and CADx systems were assessed and compared with the correct answers provided by three experienced endoscopists.

RESULTS

CADe in WLI demonstrated a sensitivity of 94.5% (95% confidence interval (CI), 92.0-96.9%) and a specificity of 87.2% (84.5-89.9%). CADe in LCI demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.0% (93.9-98.1%) and a specificity of 85.1% (82.3-87.9%). CADx in WLI demonstrated a sensitivity of 95.5% (92.9-98.1%) and a specificity of 84.4% (73.4-91.5%), resulting in an accuracy of 93.2% (90.4-96.0%). CADx in BLI showed a sensitivity of 96.3% (93.9-98.7%) and a specificity of 88.7% (77.1-95.1%), resulting in an accuracy of 94.9% (92.4-97.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

CADe and CADx demonstrated sufficient diagnostic performance to support the use of an AI system.

Detecting colon polyps in endoscopic images using artificial intelligence constructed with automated collection of annotated images from an endoscopy reporting system

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) has made considerable progress in image recognition, especially in the analysis of endoscopic images. The availability of large-scale annotated datasets has contributed to the recent progress in this field. Datasets of high-quality annotated endoscopic images are widely available, particularly in Japan. A system for collecting annotated data reported daily could aid in accumulating a significant number of high-quality annotated datasets.

AIM

We assessed the validity of using daily annotated endoscopic images in a constructed reporting system for a prototype AI model for polyp detection.

METHODS

We constructed an automated collection system for daily annotated datasets from an endoscopy reporting system. The key images were selected and annotated for each case only during daily practice, not to be performed retrospectively. We automatically extracted annotated endoscopic images of diminutive colon polyps that had been diagnosed (study period March-September 2018) using the keywords of diagnostic information, and additionally collect the normal colon images. The collected dataset was devised into training and validation to build and evaluate the AI system. The detection model was developed using a deep learning algorithm, RetinaNet.

RESULTS

The automated system collected endoscopic images (47,391) from colonoscopies (745), and extracted key colon polyp images (1356) with localized annotations. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of our AI model were 97.0%, 97.7%, and 97.3% (n = 300), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The automated system enabled the development of a high-performance colon polyp detector using images in endoscopy reporting system without the efforts of retrospective annotation works.

The Efficacy of Tumor Characterization for Colorectal Lesions with Blue Light Imaging of a Compact Light-Emitting Diode Endoscopic System Compared to a Laser Endoscopic System: A Pilot Study

Background: A compact and cost-effective light source-processor combined 3-color light-emitting diode (LED) endoscopic system (ELUXEO-Lite: EP-6000, Fujifilm Co., Tokyo) with a magnified colonoscope (EC-6600ZP, Fujifilm Co.) has been released. Aims: In this study, we analyzed the efficacy of this system for colorectal tumor characterization with magnified blue light imaging (BLI-LED) and image's subjective and objective evaluations, compared to a magnified blue laser imaging (BLI-LASER) using a standard LASER endoscopic system. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 37 lesions observed with both BLI-LED and BLI-LASER systems from 2019 using the Japanese narrow band imaging classification. Two representative magnified images, one BLI-LED and one BLI-LASER, of the same area of a lesion were evaluated for diagnostic accuracy and visualization quality by three experts and three non-experts. Their color difference values (CDVs) and brightness values (BVs) were also calculated as objective indicators. Results: Among 37 lesions, mean tumor size was 18.9 ± 13.1 mm, and 21 lesions were nonpolypoid. Histopathology revealed 14 sessile serrated lesions, 7 adenomas, 12 high-grade dysplasias and T1a cancers, and 4 T1b cancers. The diagnostic accuracy rates of BLI-LED/BLI-LASER of experts and non-experts were 90.1% and 87.4% (p = 0.52) and 89.2% and 89.2% (p = 0.99). The percentages of instances where BLI-LED images were better, the two imaging types were equivalent, or BLI-LASER images were better were 16%/83%/1% for experts and 19%/58%/23% for non-experts (p < 0.001). CDVs and BVs between BLI-LED and BLI-LASER were not significantly different (CDVs: p = 0.653, BVs: p = 0.518). Conclusions: BLI-LED using the compact system was noninferior to BLI-LASER for colorectal tumor characterization and image quality.

Detection of colorectal lesions during colonoscopy

Owing to its high mortality rate, the prevention of colorectal cancer is of particular importance. The resection of colorectal polyps is reported to drastically reduce colorectal cancer mortality, and examination by endoscopists who had a high adenoma detection rate was found to lower the risk of colorectal cancer, highlighting the importance of identifying lesions. Various devices, imaging techniques, and diagnostic tools aimed at reducing the rate of missed lesions have therefore been developed to improve detection. The distal attachments and devices for improving the endoscopic view angle are intended to help avoid missing blind spots such as folds and flexures in the colon, whereas the imaging techniques represented by image‐enhanced endoscopy contribute to improving lesion visibility. Recent advances in artificial intelligence‐supported detection systems are expected to supplement an endoscopist's eye through the instant diagnosis of the lesions displayed on the monitor. In this review, we provide an outline of each tool and assess its impact on the reduction in the incidence of missed colorectal polyps by summarizing previous clinical research and meta‐analyses. Although useful, the many devices, image‐enhanced endoscopy, and artificial intelligence tools exhibited various limitations. Integrating these tools can improve their shortcomings. Combining artificial intelligence‐based diagnoses with wide‐angle image‐enhanced endoscopy may be particularly useful. Thus, we hope that such tools will be available in the near future.

Comparison of blue laser imaging and narrow band imaging for the differentiation of diminutive colorectal polyps: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To compare the diagnostic efficacy of blue laser imaging (BLI)- bright and narrow band imaging (NBI) modes of image enhanced endoscopy (IEE) in differentiating neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions of diminutive colorectal polyps.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial from September 2015 to July 2016. The participants were randomly assigned (1:1) for colonoscopy with polyp classification under NBI or BLI-bright mode without magnification. Histopathologic diagnosis was used as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-four diminutive polyps in 164 patients were included for analysis (BLI: 162 polyps in 73 patients, NBI: 162 polyps in 91 patients). These polyps were located at colon proximal to sigmoid (61.1 and 58.0%) and rectosigmoid colon (38.9 and 42.0%) in the BLI and NBI groups, respectively. Most polyps (71.9%) were adenomatous with one malignant polyp (0.3%). BLI achieved 86.4% accuracy, 98.3% sensitivity, 55.6% specificity, 85.2% positive predictive value (PPV), and 92.6% negative predictive value (NPV), similar to NBI which exhibited 90.1% accuracy, 99.1% sensitivity, 67.4% specificity, 88.5% PPV, and 96.9% NPV in the diagnosis of adenomatous polyps. Based on the location of the polyp, both modes of IEE provided ≥ 95% NPV for diagnosis of adenomatous polyps at the rectosigmoid colon.

CONCLUSIONS

BLI-bright and NBI modes of IEE have similar accuracy in differentiation between neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions of diminutive polyps. Both modes provided ≥ 90% NPV which allows for the adaptation of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy "diagnose-and-leave" recommended strategy for diminutive polyps at the rectosigmoid colon.

Current status of diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy in Japan: The Japan Endoscopic Database Project

OBJECTIVES

The Japan Endoscopy Database Project was initiated to develop the world's largest endoscopy data repository. This study describes the first phase of the colonoscopy project in Japan.

METHODS

Data were aggregated offline by integrating information from the endoscopy database software from January 2015 through March 2017. The study population included all patients who underwent colonoscopy at eight centers.

RESULTS

A total of 31,395 patients who underwent 38,497 colonoscopy procedures were registered. The majority of procedures were performed for screening (n = 14,156), followed by fecal immunochemical test positivity (n = 3960), abdominal symptoms (n = 3864), post-colorectal surgery surveillance (n = 3431), post-endoscopic treatment surveillance (n = 3757), thorough pre-treatment examination (n = 2822), and therapeutic purposes (n = 6507). In the screening group, advanced cancers, early cancers, and adenomas were diagnosed endoscopically in 2.1%, 1.3%, and 28.7% of cases, respectively, while in the fecal immunochemical test-positive group, they were diagnosed in 2.5%, 1.9%, and 41.6% of cases, respectively. The incidence of complications was 0.177% and 0.152% in the screening and fecal immunochemical test-positive groups, respectively. The therapeutic procedures included 1446 cold forceps polypectomy procedures, 4770 cold snare polypectomy procedures, 368 hot biopsies, 2998 hot snare polypectomy procedures, 9775 endoscopic or piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resections, and 1660 endoscopic submucosal dissections. A total of 173 procedure-related complications (0.82%) occurred in 21,017 therapeutic procedures performed in 15,744 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The first phase of the Japan Endoscopy Database Project established the proportions of the diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy procedures, and complication rates in real-world settings.

Can image-enhanced endoscopy improve adenoma detection rate?

An accumulating body of evidence has shown that detection and resection of pre-cancerous adenoma by colonoscopy could effectively prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) and its related mortality. Among various colonoscopy quality indicators, such as cecal intubation rate, withdrawal time, and adenoma detection rate (ADR); ADR is the most important and most closely associated with the subsequent risk of CRC. Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE), including digital and dye-based IEE, was originally developed to discriminate neoplastic from non-neoplastic lesions but later studies have demonstrated that it can also enhance lesion detection by enhancing the contrast between the lesion and background colonic mucosa. Nevertheless, using IEE in colonoscopy for lesion detection is still not the standard way of practice in the real world. For a better understanding of current IEE modalities, this review introduces and compares the currently available IEE modalities and their efficacy in detecting adenoma from the results of randomized controlled trials or meta-analyses.

Enhancing polyp detection: technological advances in colonoscopy imaging

The detection and removal of polyps at colonoscopy is core to the current colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention strategy. However, colonoscopy is flawed with a well described miss rate and variability in detection rates associated with incomplete protection from CRC. Consequently, there is significant interest in techniques and technologies which increase polyp detection with the aim to remedy colonoscopy's ills. Technologic advances in colonoscope imaging are numerous and include; increased definition of imaging, widening field of view, virtual technologies to supplant conventional chromocolonoscopy (CC) and now computer assisted detection. However, despite nearly two decades of technologic advances, data on gains in detection from individual technologies have been modest at best and heterogenous and conflicted as a rule. This state of detection technology science is exacerbated by use of relatively blunt metrics of improvement without consensus, the myopic search for gains over single generations of technology improvement and an unhealthy focus on adenomatous lesions. Yet there remains cause for optimism as detection gains from new technology, while small, may still improve CRC prevention. The technologies are also readily available in current generation colonoscopes and have roles beyond simply detection such as lesion characterization, further improving their worth. Coupled with the imminent expansion of computer assisted detection the detection future from colonoscope imaging advances looks bright. This review aims to cover the major imaging advances and evidence for improvement in polyp detection.

An analysis about the function of a new artificial intelligence, CAD EYE with the lesion recognition and diagnosis for colorectal polyps in clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

Recently, CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan), an artificial intelligence for the lesion recognition (CADe) and the optical diagnosis (CADx) of colorectal polyps, was released. We evaluated the function of CADe and CADx of CAD EYE.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective study, we examined consecutive polyps ≤ 10 mm detected from March to April 2021 to determine whether CAD EYE could recognize them live with both normal- and high-speed observation using white-light imaging (WLI) and linked-color imaging (LCI). We then examined whether the polyps were neoplastic or hyperplastic live with magnified or non-magnified blue-laser imaging (BLI-LASER) or blue-light imaging (BLI-LED) under CAD EYE, comparing the retrospective evaluations with 5 experts and 5 trainees using still images. All polyps were histopathologically examined.

RESULTS

We analyzed 100 polyps (mean size 3.9 ± 2.6 mm; 55 neoplastic and 45 hyperplastic lesions) in 25 patients. Regarding CADe, the respective detection rates of CAD EYE with normal- and high-speed observation were 85.0% and 67.0% for WLI (p = 0.002) and 89.0% and 75.0% for LCI (p = 0.009). Regarding CADx for differentiating neoplastic and hyperplastic lesions, the diagnostic accuracy values of CAD EYE with non-magnified and magnified BLI-LASER/LED were 88.8% and 87.8%. Regarding magnified BLI-LASER/LED, the diagnostic accuracy value of CAD EYE was not significantly different from that of experts (92.0%, p = 0.17), but that of trainees (79.0%, p = 0.04). We also found no significant differences in CADe or CADx between LED (53 lesions) and LASER (47 lesions).

CONCLUSIONS

CAD EYE was a helpful tool for CADe and CADx in clinical practice.

Linked color imaging versus white light imaging colonoscopy for colorectal adenoma detection: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The adenoma detection rate is an important indicator of colonoscopy quality and colorectal cancer incidence. We compared the adenoma detection rates between white light imaging (WLI) and linked color imaging (LCI) colonoscopy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing colonoscopy for positive fecal immunochemical tests, follow-up of colon polyps, and abdominal symptoms at three institutions were randomly assigned to the LCI or WLI groups. Mean adenoma number per patient (including based on endoscopists' experience), adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, mean adenoma number per location, and adenoma size were compared.

RESULTS

The LCI and WLI groups comprised 494 and 501 patients, respectively. No significant differences in the cecal intubation rate (LCI vs WLI: 99.5% vs 99.4%), cecal intubation time, and withdrawal time were noted between groups. The mean adenoma number per patient was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (1.07 vs 0.88, P = 0.04), particularly in the descending [0.12 (58/494) vs 0.07 (35/501), P = 0.01] and sigmoid colon [0.41 (201/494) vs 0.30 (149/501), P ≤ 0.001]. However, the adenoma detection rate was 47.1% in the LCI group and 46.9% in the WLI group, with no significant difference (P = 0.93). The total number of sessile-type adenomas was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (346/494 vs 278/501, P = 0.04). As for polyp size, small polyps (≤ 5 mm) were detected at a significantly higher rate in the LCI group (271/494 vs 336/501, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Linked color imaging is significantly superior to WLI in terms of mean adenoma number per patient.

Computer-aided detection versus advanced imaging for detection of colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Computer-aided detection (CADe) techniques based on artificial intelligence algorithms can assist endoscopists in detecting colorectal neoplasia. CADe has been associated with an increased adenoma detection rate, a key quality indicator, but the utility of CADe compared with existing advanced imaging techniques and distal attachment devices is unclear.

METHODS

For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we did a comprehensive search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases from inception to Nov 30, 2020, for randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of the following endoscopic techniques in detecting colorectal neoplasia: CADe, high definition (HD) white-light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, or add-on devices (ie, systems that increase mucosal visualisation, such as full spectrum endoscopy [FUSE] or G-EYE balloon endoscopy). We collected data on adenoma detection rates, sessile serrated lesion detection rates, the proportion of large adenomas detected per colonoscopy, and withdrawal times. A frequentist framework, random-effects network meta-analysis was done to compare artificial intelligence with chromoendoscopy, increased mucosal visualisation systems, and HD white-light endoscopy (the control group). We estimated odds ratios (ORs) for the adenoma detection rate, sessile serrated lesion detection rate, and proportion of large adenomas detected per colonoscopy, and calculated mean differences for withdrawal time, with 95% CIs. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

FINDINGS

50 randomised controlled trials, comprising 34 445 participants, were included in our main analysis (six trials of CADe, 18 of chromoendoscopy, and 26 of increased mucosal visualisation systems). HD white-light endoscopy was the control technique in all 50 studies. Compared with the control technique, the adenoma detection rate was 7·4% higher with CADe (OR 1·78 [95% CI 1·44-2·18]), 4·4% higher with chromoendoscopy (1·22 [1·08-1·39]), and 4·1% higher with increased mucosal visualisation systems (1·16 [1·04-1·28]). CADe ranked as the superior technique for adenoma detection (with moderate confidence in hierarchical ranking); cross-comparisons of CADe with other imaging techniques showed a significant increase in the adenoma detection rate with CADe versus increased mucosal visualisation systems (OR 1·54 [95% CI 1·22-1·94]; low certainty of evidence) and with CADe versus chromoendoscopy (1·45 [1·14-1·85]; moderate certainty of evidence). When focusing on large adenomas (≥10 mm) there was a significant increase in the detection of large adenomas only with CADe (OR 1·69 [95% CI 1·10-2·60], moderate certainty of evidence) when compared to HD white-light endoscopy; CADe ranked as the superior strategy for detection of large adenomas. CADe also seemed to be the superior strategy for detection of sessile serrated lesions (with moderate confidence in hierarchical ranking), although no significant increase in the sessile serrated lesion detection rate was shown (OR 1·37 [95% CI 0·65-2·88]). No significant difference in withdrawal time was reported for CADe compared with the other techniques.

INTERPRETATION

Based on the published literature, detection rates of colorectal neoplasia are higher with CADe than with other techniques such as chromoendoscopy or tools that increase mucosal visualisation, supporting wider incorporation of CADe strategies into community endoscopy services.

FUNDING

None.

Detection of Colorectal Neoplasms Using Linked Color Imaging: A Prospective, Randomized, Tandem Colonoscopy Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been shown to be related to a lower incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. We analyzed the efficacy of linked color imaging (LCI) by assessing the detection, miss, and visibility of various featured adenomas as compared with white light imaging (WLI).

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, tandem trial. The participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups: first observation by LCI, then second observation by WLI (LCI group); or both observations by WLI (WLI group). Suspected neoplastic lesions were resected after magnifying image-enhanced endoscopy. The primary outcome was to compare the ADR during the first observation. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of adenoma miss rate (AMR) and visibility score.

RESULTS

A total of 780 patients were randomized, 700 of whom were included in the final analysis. The ADR was 69.6% and 63.2% in the LCI and WLI groups, respectively, with no significant difference. However, LCI improved the average ADR in low-detectors compared with high-detectors (76.0% vs 55.1%; P < .001). Total AMR was 20.6% in the LCI group, which was significantly lower than that in the WLI group (31.1%) (P < .001). AMR in the LCI group was significantly lower, especially for diminutive adenomas (23.4% vs 35.1%; P < .001) and nonpolypoid lesions (25.6% vs 37.9%; P < .001) compared with the WLI group.

CONCLUSION

Although both methods provided a similar ADR, LCI had a lower AMR than WLI. LCI could benefit endoscopists with lower ADR, an observation that warrants additional study. (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, Number: UMIN000026359).

Clinical Applications of Linked Color Imaging and Blue Laser/Light Imaging in the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Superficial Colorectal Tumors

Considering its contribution to reducing colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality, the most important task of colonoscopy is to find all existing polyps. Moreover, the accurate detection of existing polyps determines the risk of colorectal cancer morbidity and is an important factor in deciding the appropriate surveillance program for patients. Image-enhanced endoscopy is an easy-to-use modality with improved lesion detection. Linked color imaging (LCI) and blue laser/light imaging (BLI) are useful modalities for improving colonoscopy quality. Each mode has unique optical features; therefore, their intended use differs. LCI contributes to improved polyp detection due to its brightness and high color contrast between the lesion and normal mucosa, while BLI contributes to the characterization of detected polyps by evaluating the vessel and surface patterns of detected lesions. The proper use of these observation modes allows for more efficient endoscopic diagnosis. Moreover, recent developments in artificial intelligence will soon change the clinical practice of colonoscopy and this system will provide an efficient education modality for novice endoscopists.

Colonoscopy screening and surveillance guidelines

The Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance Guidelines were developed by the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society as basic guidelines based on the scientific methods. The importance of endoscopic screening and surveillance for both detection and post-treatment follow-up of colorectal cancer has been recognized as essential to reduce disease mortality. There is limited high-level evidence in this field; therefore, we had to focus on the consensus of experts. These clinical practice guidelines consist of 20 clinical questions and eight background knowledge topics that have been determined as the current guiding principles.

Designs of colonoscopic adenoma detection trials: more positive results with tandem than with parallel studies - an analysis of studies on imaging techniques and mechanical devices

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been shown to correlate with interval cancers after screening colonoscopy and is commonly used as surrogate parameter for its outcome quality. ADR improvements by various techniques have been studied in randomised trials using either parallel or tandem methodololgy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was done on randomised trials (full papers, English language) on tandem or parallel studies using either adenoma miss rates (AMR) or ADR as main outcome to test different novel technologies on imaging (new endoscope generation, narrow band imaging, iScan, Fujinon intelligent chromoendoscopy/blue laser imaging and wide angle scopes) and mechanical devices (transparent caps, endocuff, endorings and balloons). Available meta analyses were also screened for randomised studies.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 randomised tandem trials with AMR (variable definitions and methodology) and 42 parallel studies using ADR (homogeneous methodology) as primary outcome were included. Significant differences in favour of the new method were found in 66.7% of tandem studies (8222 patients) but in only 23.8% of parallel studies (28 059 patients), with higher rates of positive studies for mechanical devices than for imaging methods. In a random-effects model, small absolute risk differences were found, but these were double in magnitude for tandem as compared with parallel studies (imaging: tandem 0.04 (0.01, 0.07), parallel 0.02 (0.00, 0.04); mechanical devices: tandem 0.08 (0.00, 0.15), parallel 0.04 (0.01, 0.07)). Nevertheless, 94.2% of missed adenomas in the tandem studies were small (<1 cm) and/or non-advanced.

CONCLUSIONS

A tandem study is more likely to yield positive results than a simple parallel trial; this may be due to the use of different parameters, variable definitions and methodology, and perhaps also a higher likelihood of bias. Therefore, we suggest to accept positive results of tandem studies only if accompanied by positive results from parallel trials.

Diagnostic value of novel retroflexion colonoscopy in the right colon: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is the accepted gold standard for the detection of colorectal cancer. However, colonoscopy is less effective in preventing colon cancer in the right side compared with the left side.

AIM

To investigate the feasibility of a novel type of retroflexion colonoscope, EC-3490Ti colonoscope, for detection of proximal colon lesions.

METHODS

In this prospective trial, we recruited patients who underwent colonoscopy for screening or surveillance. When the endoscopists could not grasp the whole observation of the right-side colon mucosa in the forward view (FV), insertion and withdrawal were repeatedly performed in the FV group with the EC38-i10F colonoscope while retroflexion was performed in the retroflexed view (RV) group with the EC-3490Ti colonoscope. Adenoma detection rate, the total number of adenomas per positive participant, the success rate of retroflexion, and endoscope withdrawal time were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

The total adenoma detection rate (39.3% vs 37.7%, P = 0.646) did not show any significant difference between the two groups. However, the polyp detection rate (59.6% vs 51.0%, P = 0.002), adenoma detection rate in the right colon (21.6% vs 14.4%, P = 0.012), and the total number of adenomas per positive participant (2.1 vs 1.7, P = 0.011) reached statistical significance. Retroflexion was achieved in 91.7% of our cohort. Compared with the FV group, the withdrawal time was significantly prolonged in the RV group (586.1 ± 124.4 s vs 508.8 ± 129.6 s, P < 0.001). In contrast, the proportion of additional ancillary pressure decreased (27.4% vs 45.7%, P < 0.001), and the visual analog scale pain scores did not increase (2.7 ± 1.4 vs 2.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.377).

CONCLUSION

Retroflexion in the proximal colon could be performed successfully and safely with the EC-3490Ti colonoscope. This maneuver could detect more adenomas effectively.

Randomised comparison of postpolypectomy surveillance intervals following a two-round baseline colonoscopy: the Japan Polyp Study Workgroup

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether follow-up colonoscopy after polypectomy at 3 years only, or at 1 and 3 years would effectively detect advanced neoplasia (AN), including nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms (NP-CRNs).

DESIGN

A prospective multicentre randomised controlled trial was conducted in 11 Japanese institutions. The enrolled participants underwent a two-round baseline colonoscopy (interval: 1 year) to remove all neoplastic lesions. Subsequently, they were randomly assigned to undergo follow-up colonoscopy at 1 and 3 years (2-examination group) or at 3 years only (1-examination group). The incidence of AN, defined as lesions with low-grade dysplasia ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia or invasive cancer, at follow-up colonoscopy was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 3926 patients were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 57.3 (range: 40-69) years, and 2440 (62%) were male. Of these, 2166 patients were assigned to two groups (2-examination: 1087, 1-examination: 1079). Overall, we detected 29 AN in 28 patients at follow-up colonoscopy in both groups. On per-protocol analysis (701 in 2-examination vs 763 in 1-examination group), the incidence of AN was similar between the two groups (1.7% vs 2.1%, p=0.599). The results of the non-inferiority test were significant (p=0.017 in per-protocol, p=0.001 in intention-to-treat analysis). NP-CRNs composed of dominantly of the detected AN (62%, 18/29), and most of them were classified into laterally spreading tumour non-granular type (83%, 15/18).

CONCLUSION

After a two-round baseline colonoscopy, follow-up colonoscopy at 3 years detected AN, including NP-CRNs, as effectively as follow-up colonoscopies performed after 1 and 3 years.

Blue laser imaging combined with JNET (Japan NBI Expert Team) classification for pathological prediction of colorectal laterally spreading tumors

BACKGROUND

Blue laser imaging (BLI) can provide useful information on colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) by visualizing the surface and vessel patterns in detail. The present research aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of BLI-combined JNET (Japan NBI Expert Team) classification for identifying LSTs.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter study included 172 LSTs consisted of 6 hyperplastic polyps/sessile serrated polyps, 94 low-grade dysplasias (LGD), 60 high-grade dysplasias (HGD), 6 superficial submucosal invasive (m-SMs) carcinomas, and 4 deep submucosal invasive carcinomas. The relationship between the JNET classification and the histologic findings of these lesions were then analyzed.

RESULTS

For all LSTs, non-experts and experts had a 79.7% and 90.7% accuracy for Type 2A (P = 0.004), a sensitivity of 94.7% and 96.8% (P = 0.718), and a specificity of 61.5% and 83.3% (P = 0.002) for prediction of LGD, respectively. The results also demonstrated 80.8% and 91.3% accuracy for Type 2B (P = 0.005), a sensitivity of 65.2% and 83.3% (P = 0.017), and a specificity of 90.6% and 96.2% (P = 0.097) for predicting HGD or m-SMs. For LST-granular (LST-G) lesions, Type 2A in experts had higher specificity (65.6% vs. 83.6%, P = 0.022) and accuracy (81.8% vs. 91.2%, P = 0.022). Type 2B in experts only had higher accuracy (82.5% vs. 92.0%, P = 0.019). However, no significant differences were noted for any comparisons between non-experts and experts for LST-non-granular (LST-NG) lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

BLI combined with JNET classification was an effective method for the precise prediction of pathological diagnosis in patients with LSTs. Diagnostic performance of JNET classification by experts was better than that by non-experts for all examined LST or LST-G lesions when delineating between Type 2A and 2B, but there was no difference for the identification of LST-NG lesions by these two groups.

Linked-color imaging versus white-light colonoscopy in an organized colorectal cancer screening program

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Linked-color imaging (LCI), a new image-enhancing technology emphasizing contrast in mucosal color, has been demonstrated to substantially reduce polyp miss rate as compared with standard white-light imaging (WLI) in tandem colonoscopy studies. Whether LCI increases adenoma detection rate (ADR) remains unclear.

METHODS

Consecutive subjects undergoing screening colonoscopy after fecal immunochemical test (FIT) positivity were 1:1 randomized to undergo colonoscopy with LCI or WLI, both in high-definition systems. Insertion and withdrawal phases of each colonoscopy were carried out using the same assigned light. Experienced endoscopists from 7 Italian centers participated in the study. Randomization was stratified by gender, age, and screening round. The primary outcome measure was represented by ADR.

RESULTS

Of 704 eligible subjects, 649 were included (48.9% men, mean age ± standard deviation, 60.8 ± 7.3 years) and randomized to LCI (n = 326) or WLI (n = 323) colonoscopy. The ADR was higher in the LCI group (51.8%) than in the WLI group (43.7%) (relative risk, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.40). The proportions of patients with advanced adenomas and sessile serrated lesions were, respectively, 21.2% and 8.6% in the LCI arm and 18.9% and 5.9% in the WLI arm (not significant for both comparisons). At multivariate analysis, LCI was independently associated with ADR, along with male gender, increasing age, and adequate (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score ≥6) bowel preparation. At per-polyp analysis, the mean ± standard deviation number of adenomas per colonoscopy was comparable in the LCI and WLI arms, whereas the corresponding figures for proximal adenomas was significantly higher in the LCI group (.72 ± 1.2 vs .55 ± 1.07, P = .05) CONCLUSIONS: In FIT-positive patients undergoing screening colonoscopy, the routine use of LCI significantly increased the ADR. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03690297.).

Blue laser imaging and linked color imaging improve the color difference value and visibility of colorectal polyps in underwater conditions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has become widespread for treating colorectal polyps. However, which observational mode is best suited for determining polyp margins underwater remains unclear. To determine the best mode, we analyzed three imaging modes: white light imaging (WLI), blue laser imaging (BLI) and linked color imaging (LCI).

METHODS

Images of consecutive colorectal polyps previously examined by these three modes before UEMR were analyzed according to the degree of underwater turbidity (transparent or cloudy). Color differences between the polyps and their surroundings were calculated using the Commission Internationale d'Eclairage Lab color space in which 3-D color parameters were expressed. Eight evaluators, who were blinded to the histology, scored the visibility from one (undetectable) to four (easily detectable) in both underwater conditions. The color differences and visibility scores were compared.

RESULTS

Seventy-three polyps were evaluated. Sixty-one polyps (44 adenomatous, 17 serrated) were observed under transparent conditions, and 12 polyps (seven adenomatous, five serrated) were observed under cloudy conditions. Under transparent conditions, color differences for the BLI (8.5) and LCI (7.9) were significantly higher than that of WLI (5.7; P < 0.001). Visibility scores for BLI (3.6) and LCI (3.4) were also higher than that of WLI (3.1; P < 0.0001). Under cloudy conditions, visibility scores for LCI (2.9) and WLI (2.7) were significantly higher than that of BLI (2.2; P < 0.0001 and P = 0.04, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

BLI and LCI were better observational modes in transparent water; however, BLI was unsuitable for cloudy conditions.

Comparison Between Linked Color Imaging and Blue Laser Imaging for Improving the Visibility of Flat Colorectal Polyps: A Multicenter Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Linked color imaging (LCI) and blue laser imaging-bright (BLI-b) improve the visibility of gastrointestinal lesions. In this multicenter study, we compared the effects of LCI and BLI-b on the visibility of flat polyps with visibility scores and color difference (CD) values, including fast-withdrawal and large-monitor observation.

METHODS

We recorded 120 videos of 40 consecutive flat polyps (2-20 mm), adenoma, and sessile serrated adenoma and polyp (SSA/P), using white light imaging (WLI), BLI-b, and LCI from July 2017 to December 2017. All videos were evaluated by eight endoscopists according to a published polyp visibility score of 4 (excellent) to 1 (poor). Additionally, 1.5 ×faster and 1.7 ×sized videos were evaluated. Moreover, we calculated the CD values for each polyp in three modes.

RESULTS

The mean LCI scores (3.1 ± 0.9) were significantly higher than the WLI scores (2.5 ± 1.0, p < 0.001) but not significantly higher than the BLI-b scores (3.0 ± 1.0). The scores of faster videos on LCI (3.0 ± 1.1) were significantly higher than WLI (2.0 ± 1.0, p < 0.001) and BLI-b (2.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.03). The scores of larger-sized videos on LCI were not significantly higher than those of WLI or BLI-b. The CD value of LCI (18.0 ± 7.7) was higher than that of WLI (11.7 ± 7.0, p < 0.001), but was not significantly higher than that of BLI-b (16.6 ± 9.6). The CD value of LCI was significantly higher than that of BLI-b for adenoma, but the CD value of BLI-b was significantly higher than that of LCI for SSA/P.

CONCLUSIONS

The superiority of LCI to BLI-b was proven for the visibility of adenoma and fast observation.

Optical imaging technology in colonoscopy: Is there a role for photometric stereo?

Colonoscopy screening for the detection and removal of colonic adenomas is central to efforts to reduce the morbidity and mortality of colorectal cancer. However, up to a third of adenomas may be missed at colonoscopy, and the majority of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers are thought to arise from these. Adenomas have three-dimensional surface topographic features that differentiate them from adjacent normal mucosa. However, these topographic features are not enhanced by white light colonoscopy, and the endoscopist must infer these from two-dimensional cues. This may contribute to the number of missed lesions. A variety of optical imaging technologies have been developed commercially to enhance surface topography. However, existing techniques enhance surface topography indirectly, and in two dimensions, and the evidence does not wholly support their use in routine clinical practice. In this narrative review, co-authored by gastroenterologists and engineers, we summarise the evidence for the impact of established optical imaging technologies on adenoma detection rate, and review the development of photometric stereo (PS) for colonoscopy. PS is a machine vision technique able to capture a dense array of surface normals to render three-dimensional reconstructions of surface topography. This imaging technique has several potential clinical applications in colonoscopy, including adenoma detection, polyp classification, and facilitating polypectomy, an inherently three-dimensional task. However, the development of PS for colonoscopy is at an early stage. We consider the progress that has been made with PS to date and identify the obstacles that need to be overcome prior to clinical application.

The efficacy of tumor characterization and tumor detectability of linked color imaging and blue laser imaging with an LED endoscope compared to a LASER endoscope

OBJECTIVES

An endoscope with a light-emitting diode (LED) light source which has a 2-mm close-distance observation function without magnification, has been marketed, enabling linked color imaging (LCI) and blue laser imaging (BLI) for tumor detection and characterization. We analyzed the efficacy of a LED endoscope compared to a LASER endoscope.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 272 lesions observed using the LED endoscopic system (Fujifilm Co., Tokyo, Japan) from May 2018 to September 2019. The Japanese NBI Classification was used for tumor characterization. We analyzed the diagnostic accuracy and confidence level. Sixty-one lesions observed with both the LED and magnified LASER endoscopes were also analyzed to compare the diagnostic accuracy. Regarding the tumor detectability, we calculated color difference values (CDVs) and brightness values (BVs) of white-light imaging, BLI, and LCI modes between the two endoscopes for each tumor.

RESULTS

The mean polyp size was 9.2 ± 11.3 mm. Histology showed 71 sessile serrated lesions, 193 adenoma and high-grade dysplasias, and 8 T1 cancers. The diagnostic accuracy of tumors ≥ 10 and < 10 mm was 72.0% and 92.9% (p < 0.001), respectively and the high confidence rate was 93.8%. The diagnostic accuracy of LED (77.0%) was a little higher than that of LASER without magnification (65.6%, p = 0.16) but was not inferior to that of LASER with magnification (82.0%, p = 0.50). The respective CDVs of LED and LASER endoscopes were 20.6 ± 11.2 and 21.6 ± 11.2 for LCI (p = 0.30), and the respective BVs were 210.0 ± 24.2 and 175.9 ± 21.1 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A LED endoscope with close-distance observation improved tumor detection and characterization due to high brightness.

Significance of Linked Color Imaging for Predicting the Risk of Clinical Relapse in Ulcerative Colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease with unknown etiology. Recently, mucosal healing has emerged as an important therapeutic endpoint in UC. Linked color imaging (LCI) is a novel endoscopic system that enhances the color differences of the gastrointestinal mucosa. Our previous study emphasized the redness and yellowness of the lesion using LCI observation, which was useful for the evaluation of histological mucosal activity in UC. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation between LCI observation and clinical relapse rate in UC patients. We retrospectively analyzed UC patients who underwent total colonoscopy between August 2016 and October 2018 at our facility with Mayo endoscopic scores of 0 or 1. We assessed the correlation between orange-like color lesion (defined as LCI-scarlet color lesions) and clinical relapse rate (requiring additional treatment for UC) during the 1-year follow-up period. Fifty-eight patients (22 female, 36 male; median age at diagnosis, 47.2 (18–80) years) who underwent colonoscopy were analyzed. During the 1-year follow-up period, clinical relapse was observed in 12 patients (20.1%) among which ten patients (83.3%) had an LCI-scarlet color lesions recognized by LCI. By contrast, 29 patients (63%) had no LCI-scarlet color lesions in the clinical remission group (n = 46). There was a significant difference in LCI-scarlet color between the clinical relapse and remission groups, remaining significantly associated with clinical relapse. LCI findings, including an orange-like color lesion, have diagnostic implications for predicting the risk of clinical relapse in UC during the 1-year follow-up period.

Automatic detection of early gastric cancer in endoscopic images using a transferring convolutional neural network

Endoscopic image diagnosis assisted by machine learning is useful for reducing misdetection and interobserver variability. Although many results have been reported, few effective methods are available to automatically detect early gastric cancer. Early gastric cancer have poor morphological features, which implies that automatic detection methods can be extremely difficult to construct. In this study, we proposed a convolutional neural network-based automatic detection scheme to assist the diagnosis of early gastric cancer in endoscopic images. We performed transfer learning using two classes (cancer and normal) of image datasets that have detailed texture information on lesions derived from a small number of annotated images. The accuracy of our trained network was 87.6%, and the sensitivity and specificity were well balanced, which is important for future practical use. We also succeeded in presenting a candidate region of early gastric cancer as a heat map of unknown images. The detection accuracy was 82.8%. This means that our proposed scheme may offer substantial assistance to endoscopists in decision making.

Improving serrated adenoma detection rate in the colon by electronic chromoendoscopy and distal attachment: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The evidence for modification of conventional colonoscopy using either "distal attachments" (DAs; endocap, endocuff, and endoring) or "electronic chromoendoscopy" (EC; narrow-band imaging [NBI], iScan, blue-light imaging, autofluorescence imaging, and linked-color imaging) to improve the detection of serrated adenomas during colonoscopy has shown conflicting results.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed using Medline, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane Library based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any DA or EC with high-definition white-light colonoscopy for detection of serrated adenomas (sessile serrated adenoma/polyp and traditional serrated adenoma) were included. The primary outcome was serrated adenoma detection rate (SADR) defined as the number of patients with at least 1 serrated adenoma of total patients in that group. The secondary outcome was the number of serrated adenomas per subject. Pooled rates were reported using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies with 13,631 patients (56% men; age range, 50-66 years) met the inclusion criteria. The use of DAs (RR, 1.21; P = .45) and EC (RR, 1.29; P = .09) during colonoscopy did not show a significant improvement in SADR. The SADR using EC was 6.9% (4 studies) and that with NBI alone was 3.7% (3 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that, except for NBI, the use of DAs or EC during colonoscopy does not improve detection of serrated adenomas in the colon. More RCTs evaluating NBI are needed to explore the effect.