Artificial intelligence, capsule endoscopy, databases, and the Sword of Damocles

Polypoid Lesion Segmentation Using YOLO-V8 Network in Wireless Video Capsule Endoscopy Images

Gastrointestinal (GI) tract disorders are a significant public health issue. They are becoming more common and can cause serious health problems and high healthcare costs. Small bowel tumours (SBTs) and colorectal cancer (CRC) are both becoming more prevalent, especially among younger adults. Early detection and removal of polyps (precursors of malignancy) is essential for prevention. Wireless Capsule Endoscopy (WCE) is a procedure that utilises swallowable camera devices that capture images of the GI tract. Because WCE generates a large number of images, automated polyp segmentation is crucial. This paper reviews computer-aided approaches to polyp detection using WCE imagery and evaluates them using a dataset of labelled anomalies and findings. The study focuses on YOLO-V8, an improved deep learning model, for polyp segmentation and finds that it performs better than existing methods, achieving high precision and recall. The present study underscores the potential of automated detection systems in improving GI polyp identification.

Inter/Intra-Observer Agreement in Video-Capsule Endoscopy: Are We Getting It All Wrong? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Video-capsule endoscopy (VCE) reading is a time- and energy-consuming task. Agreement on findings between readers (either different or the same) is a crucial point for increasing performance and providing valid reports. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to provide an evaluation of inter/intra-observer agreement in VCE reading. A systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science was performed throughout September 2022. The degree of observer agreement, expressed with different test statistics, was extracted. As different statistics are not directly comparable, our analyses were stratified by type of test statistics, dividing them in groups of “None/Poor/Minimal”, “Moderate/Weak/Fair”, “Good/Excellent/Strong” and “Perfect/Almost perfect” to report the proportions of each. In total, 60 studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 579 comparisons. The quality of included studies, assessed with the MINORS score, was sufficient in 52/60 studies. The most common test statistics were the Kappa statistics for categorical outcomes (424 comparisons) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous outcomes (73 comparisons). In the overall comparison of inter-observer agreement, only 23% were evaluated as “good” or “perfect”; for intra-observer agreement, this was the case in 36%. Sources of heterogeneity (high, I² 81.8–98.1%) were investigated with meta-regressions, showing a possible role of country, capsule type and year of publication in Kappa inter-observer agreement. VCE reading suffers from substantial heterogeneity and sub-optimal agreement in both inter- and intra-observer evaluation. Artificial-intelligence-based tools and the adoption of a unified terminology may progressively enhance levels of agreement in VCE reading.