Artificial intelligence-assisted optical diagnosis for the resect-and-discard strategy in clinical practice: the Artificial intelligence BLI Characterization (ABC) study

The 2023 top 10 list of endoscopy topics in medical publishing: an annual review by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Editorial Board

Using a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2023 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (GIE) and other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals, the GIE Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy compiled a list of the top 10 most significant topic areas in general and advanced GI endoscopy during the year. Each GIE Editorial Board member was directed to consider 3 criteria in generating candidate topics-significance, novelty, and impact on global clinical practice-and subject matter consensus was facilitated by the Chair through electronic voting and a meeting of the entire GIE Editorial Board. The 10 identified areas collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic spheres: GI bleeding, endohepatology, endoscopic palliation, artificial intelligence and polyp detection, artificial intelligence beyond the colon, better polypectomy and EMR, how to make endoscopy units greener, high-quality upper endoscopy, endoscopic tissue apposition and closure devices, and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Each board member was assigned a topic area around which to summarize relevant important articles, thereby generating this overview of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2023.

Will artificial intelligence reach any limit in gastroenterology?

Endoscopy is the cornerstone in the management of digestive diseases. Over the last few decades, technology has played an important role in the development of this field, helping endoscopists in better detecting and characterizing luminal lesions. However, despite ongoing advancements in endoscopic technology, the incidence of missed pre-neoplastic and neoplastic lesions remains high due to the operator-dependent nature of endoscopy and the challenging learning curve associated with new technologies. Artificial intelligence (AI), an operator-independent field, could be an invaluable solution. AI can serve as a “second observer”, enhancing the performance of endoscopists in detecting and characterizing luminal lesions. By utilizing deep learning (DL), an innovation within machine learning, AI automatically extracts input features from targeted endoscopic images. DL encompasses both computer-aided detection and computer-aided diagnosis, assisting endoscopists in reducing missed detection rates and predicting the histology of luminal digestive lesions. AI applications in clinical gastrointestinal diseases are continuously expanding and evolving the entire digestive tract. In all published studies, real-time AI assists endoscopists in improving the performance of non-expert gastroenterologists, bringing it to a level comparable to that of experts. The development of DL may be affected by selection biases. Studies have utilized different AI-assisted models, which are heterogeneous. In the future, algorithms need validation through large, randomized trials. Theoretically, AI has no limit to assist endoscopists in increasing the accuracy and the quality of endoscopic exams. However, practically, we still have a long way to go before standardizing our AI models to be accepted and applied by all gastroenterologists.

Artificial Intelligence for Real-Time Prediction of the Histology of Colorectal Polyps by General Endoscopists

BACKGROUND

Real-time prediction of histologic features of small colorectal polyps may prevent resection and/or pathologic evaluation and therefore decrease colonoscopy costs. Previous studies showed that computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) was highly accurate, though it did not outperform expert endoscopists.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the diagnostic performance of histologic predictions by general endoscopists before and after assistance from CADx in a real-life setting.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter, single-group study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04437615).

SETTING

6 centers across the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

1252 consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy and 49 general endoscopists with variable experience in real-time prediction of polyp histologic features.

INTERVENTION

Real-time use of CADx during routine colonoscopy.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary end points were the sensitivity and specificity of CADx-unassisted and CADx-assisted histologic predictions for adenomas measuring 5 mm or less. For clinical purposes, additional estimates according to location and confidence level were provided.

RESULTS

The CADx device made a diagnosis for 2695 polyps measuring 5 mm or less (96%) in 1252 patients. There was no difference in sensitivity between the unassisted and assisted groups (90.7% vs. 90.8%; P = 0.52). Specificity was higher in the CADx-assisted group (59.5% vs. 64.7%; P < 0.001). Among all 2695 polyps measuring 5 mm or less, 88.2% and 86.1% (P < 0.001) in the CADx-assisted and unassisted groups, respectively, could be resected and discarded without pathologic evaluation. Among 743 rectosigmoid polyps measuring 5 mm or less, 49.5% and 47.9% (P < 0.001) in the CADx-assisted and unassisted groups, respectively, could be left in situ without resection.

LIMITATION

Decision making based on CADx might differ outside a clinical trial.

CONCLUSION

CADx assistance did not result in increased sensitivity of optical diagnosis. Despite a slight increase, the specificity of CADx-assisted diagnosis remained suboptimal.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Olympus America Corporation served as the clinical study sponsor.

Enhancing artificial intelligence-doctor collaboration for computer-aided diagnosis in colonoscopy through improved digital literacy

Establishing appropriate trust and maintaining a balanced reliance on digital resources are vital for accurate optical diagnoses and effective integration of computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) in colonoscopy. Active learning using diverse polyp image datasets can help in developing precise CADx systems. Enhancing doctors' digital literacy and interpreting their results is crucial. Explainable artificial intelligence (AI) addresses opacity, and textual descriptions, along with AI-generated content, deepen the interpretability of AI-based findings by doctors. AI conveying uncertainties and decision confidence aids doctors' acceptance of results. Optimal AI-doctor collaboration requires improving algorithm performance, transparency, addressing uncertainties, and enhancing doctors' optical diagnostic skills.

Artificial Intelligence-assisted colonoscopy and colorectal cancer screening: Where are we going?

Colorectal cancer is a significant global health concern, necessitating effective screening strategies to reduce its incidence and mortality rates. Colonoscopy plays a crucial role in the detection and removal of colorectal neoplastic precursors. However, there are limitations and variations in the performance of endoscopists, leading to missed lesions and suboptimal outcomes. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) in endoscopy offers promising opportunities to improve the quality and efficacy of screening colonoscopies. In particular, AI applications, including computer-aided detection (CADe) and computer-aided characterization (CADx), have demonstrated the potential to enhance adenoma detection and optical diagnosis accuracy. Additionally, AI-assisted quality control systems aim to standardize the endoscopic examination process. This narrative review provides an overview of AI principles and discusses the current knowledge on AI-assisted endoscopy in the context of screening colonoscopies. It highlights the significant role of AI in improving lesion detection, characterization, and quality assurance during colonoscopy. However, further well-designed studies are needed to validate the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted colonoscopy before its widespread implementation.

Precision endoscopy in colorectal polyps' characterization and planning of endoscopic therapy

Precision endoscopy in the management of colorectal polyps and early colorectal cancer has emerged as the standard of care. It includes optical characterization of polyps and estimation of submucosal invasion depth of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps to select the appropriate endoscopic resection modality. Over time, several imaging modalities have been implemented in endoscopic practice to improve optical performance. Among these, image-enhanced endoscopy systems and magnification endoscopy represent now well-established tools. New advanced technologies, such as endocytoscopy and confocal laser endomicroscopy, have recently shown promising results in predicting the histology of colorectal polyps. In recent years, artificial intelligence has continued to enhance endoscopic performance in the characterization of colorectal polyps, overcoming the limitations of other imaging modes. In this review we retrace the path of precision endoscopy, analyzing the yield of various endoscopic imaging techniques in personalizing management of colorectal polyps and early colorectal cancer.

Computer-Aided Diagnosis for Leaving Colorectal Polyps In Situ : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) allows prediction of polyp histology during colonoscopy, which may reduce unnecessary removal of nonneoplastic polyps. However, the potential benefits and harms of CADx are still unclear.

PURPOSE

To quantify the benefit and harm of using CADx in colonoscopy for the optical diagnosis of small (≤5-mm) rectosigmoid polyps.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched for articles published before 22 December 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Histologically verified diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated the real-time performance of physicians in predicting neoplastic change of small rectosigmoid polyps without or with CADx assistance during colonoscopy.

DATA EXTRACTION

The clinical benefit and harm were estimated on the basis of accuracy values of the endoscopist before and after CADx assistance. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework. The outcome measure for benefit was the proportion of polyps predicted to be nonneoplastic that would avoid removal with the use of CADx. The outcome measure for harm was the proportion of neoplastic polyps that would be not resected and left in situ due to an incorrect diagnosis with the use of CADx. Histology served as the reference standard for both outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ten studies, including 3620 patients with 4103 small rectosigmoid polyps, were analyzed. The studies that assessed the performance of CADx alone (9 studies; 3237 polyps) showed a sensitivity of 87.3% (95% CI, 79.2% to 92.5%) and specificity of 88.9% (CI, 81.7% to 93.5%) in predicting neoplastic change. In the studies that compared histology prediction performance before versus after CADx assistance (4 studies; 2503 polyps), there was no difference in the proportion of polyps predicted to be nonneoplastic that would avoid removal (55.4% vs. 58.4%; risk ratio [RR], 1.06 [CI, 0.96 to 1.17]; moderate-certainty evidence) or in the proportion of neoplastic polyps that would be erroneously left in situ (8.2% vs. 7.5%; RR, 0.95 [CI, 0.69 to 1.33]; moderate-certainty evidence).

LIMITATION

The application of optical diagnosis was only simulated, potentially altering the decision-making process of the operator.

CONCLUSION

Computer-aided diagnosis provided no incremental benefit or harm in the management of small rectosigmoid polyps during colonoscopy.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

European Commission. (PROSPERO: CRD42023402197).

Autonomous Artificial Intelligence vs Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Human Optical Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based optical diagnosis systems (CADx) have been developed to allow pathology prediction of colorectal polyps during colonoscopies. However, CADx systems have not yet been validated for autonomous performance. Therefore, we conducted a trial comparing autonomous AI to AI-assisted human (AI-H) optical diagnosis.

METHODS

We performed a randomized noninferiority trial of patients undergoing elective colonoscopies at 1 academic institution. Patients were randomized into (1) autonomous AI-based CADx optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps without human input or (2) diagnosis by endoscopists who performed optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps after seeing the real-time CADx diagnosis. The primary outcome was accuracy in optical diagnosis in both arms using pathology as the gold standard. Secondary outcomes included agreement with pathology for surveillance intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 467 patients were randomized (238 patients/158 polyps in the autonomous AI group and 229 patients/179 polyps in the AI-H group). Accuracy for optical diagnosis was 77.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 69.7-84.7) in the autonomous AI group and 72.1% (95% CI, 65.5-78.6) in the AI-H group (P = .86). For high-confidence diagnoses, accuracy for optical diagnosis was 77.2% (95% CI, 69.7-84.7) in the autonomous AI group and 75.5% (95% CI, 67.9-82.0) in the AI-H group. Autonomous AI had statistically significantly higher agreement with pathology-based surveillance intervals compared to AI-H (91.5% [95% CI, 86.9-96.1] vs 82.1% [95% CI, 76.5-87.7]; P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS

Autonomous AI-based optical diagnosis exhibits noninferior accuracy to endoscopist-based diagnosis. Both autonomous AI and AI-H exhibited relatively low accuracy for optical diagnosis; however, autonomous AI achieved higher agreement with pathology-based surveillance intervals. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT05236790).

Appropriate trust in artificial intelligence for the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps: The role of human/artificial intelligence interaction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps is thoroughly investigated. However, studies on human-artificial intelligence interaction are lacking. Our aim was to investigate endoscopists' trust in CADx by evaluating whether communicating a calibrated algorithm confidence score improved trust.

METHODS

Endoscopists optically diagnosed 60 colorectal polyps. Initially, endoscopists diagnosed the polyps without CADx assistance (initial diagnosis). Immediately afterward, the same polyp was again shown with a CADx prediction: either only a prediction (benign or premalignant) or a prediction accompanied by a calibrated confidence score (0-100). A confidence score of 0 indicated a benign prediction, 100 a (pre)malignant prediction. In half of the polyps, CADx was mandatory, and for the other half, CADx was optional. After reviewing the CADx prediction, endoscopists made a final diagnosis. Histopathology was used as the gold standard. Endoscopists' trust in CADx was measured as CADx prediction utilization: the willingness to follow CADx predictions when the endoscopists initially disagreed with the CADx prediction.

RESULTS

Twenty-three endoscopists participated. Presenting CADx predictions increased the endoscopists' diagnostic accuracy (69.3% initial vs 76.6% final diagnosis, P < .001). The CADx prediction was used in 36.5% (n = 183 of 501) disagreements. Adding a confidence score led to lower CADx prediction utilization, except when the confidence score surpassed 60. Mandatory CADx decreased CADx prediction utilization compared to optional CADx. Appropriate trust-using correct or disregarding incorrect CADx predictions-was 48.7% (n = 244 of 501).

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate trust was common, and CADx prediction utilization was highest for the optional CADx without confidence scores. These results express the importance of a better understanding of human-artificial intelligence interaction.

Computer-aided diagnosis system for optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps under white light imaging

OBJECTIVES

This study presents a novel computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) designed for optically diagnosing colorectal polyps using white light imaging (WLI).We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the CADx and its auxiliary role among endoscopists with different levels of expertise.

METHODS

We collected 2,324 neoplastic and 3,735 nonneoplastic polyp WLI images for model training, and 838 colorectal polyp images from 740 patients for model validation. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the CADx with that of 15 endoscopists under WLI and narrow band imaging (NBI). The auxiliary benefits of CADx for endoscopists of different experience levels and for identifying different types of colorectal polyps was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The CADx demonstrated an optical diagnostic accuracy of 84.49%, showing considerable superiority over all endoscopists, irrespective of whether WLI or NBI was used (P < 0.001). Assistance from the CADx significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy of the endoscopists from 68.84% to 77.49% (P = 0.001), with the most significant impact observed among novice endoscopists. Notably, novices using CADx-assisted WLI outperform junior and expert endoscopists without such assistance.

CONCLUSIONS

The CADx demonstrated a crucial role in substantially enhancing the precision of optical diagnosis for colorectal polyps under WLI and showed the greatest auxiliary benefits for novice endoscopists.

White light computer-aided optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps in routine clinical practice

Background and study aims Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems could make the optical diagnosis (OD) of diminutive colorectal polyps (DCPs) more reliable and objective. This study was aimed at prospectively evaluating feasibility and diagnostic performance of AI-standalone and AI-assisted OD of DCPs in a real-life setting by using a white light-based system (GI Genius, Medtronic Co, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States). Patients and methods Consecutive colonoscopy outpatients with at least one DCP were evaluated by 11 endoscopists (5 experts and 6 non-experts in OD). DCPs were classified in real time by AI (AI-standalone OD) and by the endoscopist with the assistance of AI (AI-assisted OD), with histopathology as the reference standard. Results Of the 480 DCPs, AI provided the outcome "adenoma" or "non-adenoma" in 81.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.5-84.6). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and accuracy of AI-standalone OD were 97.0% (95% CI 94.0-98.6), 38.1% (95% CI 28.9-48.1), 80.1% (95% CI 75.2-84.2), 83.3% (95% CI 69.2-92.0), and 80.5% (95% CI 68.7-82.8%), respectively. Compared with AI-standalone, the specificity of AI-assisted OD was significantly higher (58.9%, 95% CI 49.7-67.5) and a trend toward an increase was observed for other diagnostic performance measures. Overall accuracy and negative predictive value of AI-assisted OD for experts and non-experts were 85.8% (95% CI 80.0-90.4) vs. 80.1% (95% CI 73.6-85.6) and 89.1% (95% CI 75.6-95.9) vs. 80.0% (95% CI 63.9-90.4), respectively. Conclusions Standalone AI is able to provide an OD of adenoma/non-adenoma in more than 80% of DCPs, with a high sensitivity but low specificity. The human-machine interaction improved diagnostic performance, especially when experts were involved.

As how artificial intelligence is revolutionizing endoscopy

With incessant advances in information technology and its implications in all domains of our lives, artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a requirement for improved machine performance. This brings forth the query of how this can benefit endoscopists and improve both diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy in each part of the gastrointestinal tract. Additionally, it also raises the question of the recent benefits and clinical usefulness of this new technology in daily endoscopic practice. There are two main categories of AI systems: computer-assisted detection (CADe) for lesion detection and computer-assisted diagnosis (CADx) for optical biopsy and lesion characterization. Quality assurance is the next step in the complete monitoring of high-quality colonoscopies. In all cases, computer-aided endoscopy is used, as the overall results rely on the physician. Video capsule endoscopy is a unique example in which a computer operates a device, stores multiple images, and performs an accurate diagnosis. While there are many expectations, we need to standardize and assess various software packages. It is important for healthcare providers to support this new development and make its use an obligation in daily clinical practice. In summary, AI represents a breakthrough in digestive endoscopy. Screening for gastric and colonic cancer detection should be improved, particularly outside expert centers. Prospective and multicenter trials are mandatory before introducing new software into clinical practice.

Detailed Superiority of the CAD EYE Artificial Intelligence System over Endoscopists for Lesion Detection and Characterization Using Unique Movie Sets

Objectives

Detailed superiority of CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan), an artificial intelligence for polyp detection/diagnosis, compared to endoscopists is not well examined. We examined endoscopist's ability using movie sets of colorectal lesions which were detected and diagnosed by CAD EYE accurately.

Methods

Consecutive lesions of ≤10 mm were examined live by CAD EYE from March-June 2022 in our institution. Short unique movie sets of each lesion with and without CAD EYE were recorded simultaneously using two recorders for detection under white light imaging (WLI) and linked color imaging (LCI) and diagnosis under blue laser/light imaging (BLI). Excluding inappropriate movies, 100 lesions detected and diagnosed with CAD EYE accurately were evaluated. Movies without CAD EYE were evaluated first by three trainees and three experts. Subsequently, movies with CAD EYE were examined. The rates of accurate detection and diagnosis were evaluated for both movie sets.

Results

Among 100 lesions (mean size: 4.7±2.6 mm; 67 neoplastic/33 hyperplastic), mean accurate detection rates of movies without or with CAD EYE were 78.7%/96.7% under WLI (p<0.01) and 91.3%/97.3% under LCI (p<0.01) for trainees and 85.3%/99.0% under WLI (p<0.01) and 92.6%/99.3% under LCI (p<0.01) for experts. Mean accurate diagnosis rates of movies without or with CAD EYE for BLI were 85.3%/100% for trainees (p<0.01) and 92.3%/100% for experts (p<0.01), respectively. The significant risk factors of not-detected lesions for trainees were right-sided, hyperplastic, not-reddish, in the corner, halation, and inadequate bowel preparation.

Conclusions

Unique movie sets with and without CAD EYE could suggest it's efficacy for lesion detection/diagnosis.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Resect-and-Discard and Resect-and-Retrieve Strategies for Diminutive Colonic Polyps

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Diminutive polyps present a unique challenge in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention strategies. This study aims to assess the characteristics and variables of diminutive polyps in a Romanian cohort, intending to develop a combined resect-and-retrieve or resect-and-discard strategy that reduces the need for an optical diagnosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted at two endoscopy centers in Romania from July to December 2021. Adult patients undergoing colonoscopies where polyps were identified and resected were included. Endoscopic procedures employed advanced diagnostic features, including blue-light imaging (BLI) and narrow-band imaging (NBI). Logistic regression analysis was utilized to determine factors impacting the probability of adenomatous polyps with high-grade dysplasia (HGD).

RESULTS

A total of 427 patients were included, with a mean age of 59.42 years (±11.19), predominantly male (60.2%). The most common indication for a colonoscopy was lower gastrointestinal symptoms (42.6%), followed by screening (28.8%). Adequate bowel preparation was achieved in 87.8% of cases. The logistic regression analysis revealed significant predictors of HGD in adenomatous polyps: age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01-1.08, p = 0.01) and polyp size (>5 mm vs. ≤5 mm, OR = 4.4, 95% CI: 1.94-10.06, p < 0.001). Polyps classified as Paris IIa, Ip, and Isp were significantly more likely to harbor HGD compared to the reference group (Is), with odds ratios of 6.05, 3.68, and 2.7, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The study elucidates significant associations between the presence of HGD in adenomatous polyps and factors such as age, polyp size, and Paris classification. These findings support the feasibility of a tailored approach in the resect-and-discard and resect-and-retrieve strategies for diminutive polyps, potentially optimizing CRC prevention and intervention practices. Further research is warranted to validate these strategies in broader clinical settings.

Computer-aided diagnosis improves characterization of Barrett's neoplasia by general endoscopists (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Characterization of visible abnormalities in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) can be challenging, especially for inexperienced endoscopists. This results in suboptimal diagnostic accuracy and poor interobserver agreement. Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems may assist endoscopists. We aimed to develop, validate, and benchmark a CADx system for BE neoplasia.

METHODS

The CADx system received pretraining with ImageNet and then consecutive domain-specific pretraining with GastroNet, which includes 5 million endoscopic images. It was subsequently trained and internally validated using 1758 narrow-band imaging (NBI) images of early BE neoplasia (352 patients) and 1838 NBI images of nondysplastic BE (173 patients) from 8 international centers. CADx was tested prospectively on corresponding image and video test sets with 30 cases (20 patients) of BE neoplasia and 60 cases (31 patients) of nondysplastic BE. The test set was benchmarked by 44 general endoscopists in 2 phases (phase 1, no CADx assistance; phase 2, with CADx assistance). Ten international BE experts provided additional benchmark performance.

RESULTS

Stand-alone sensitivity and specificity of the CADx system were 100% and 98% for images and 93% and 96% for videos, respectively. CADx outperformed general endoscopists without CADx assistance in terms of sensitivity (P = .04). Sensitivity and specificity of general endoscopists increased from 84% to 96% and 90% to 98% with CAD assistance (P < .001). CADx assistance increased endoscopists' confidence in characterization (P < .001). CADx performance was similar to that of the BE experts.

CONCLUSIONS

CADx assistance significantly increased characterization performance of BE neoplasia by general endoscopists to the level of expert endoscopists. The use of this CADx system may thereby improve daily Barrett surveillance.

Colorectal cancer screening: A review of current knowledge and progress in research

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide, being the third most commonly diagnosed malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Despite the progress in screening, early diagnosis, and treatment, approximately 20%-25% of CRC patients still present with metastatic disease at the time of their initial diagnosis. Furthermore, the burden of disease is still expected to increase, especially in individuals younger than 50 years old, among whom early-onset CRC incidence has been increasing. Screening and early detection are pivotal to improve CRC-related outcomes. It is well established that CRC screening not only reduces incidence, but also decreases deaths from CRC. Diverse screening strategies have proven effective in decreasing both CRC incidence and mortality, though variations in efficacy have been reported across the literature. However, uncertainties persist regarding the optimal screening method, age intervals and periodicity. Moreover, adherence to CRC screening remains globally low. In recent years, emerging technologies, notably artificial intelligence, and non-invasive biomarkers, have been developed to overcome these barriers. However, controversy exists over the actual impact of some of the new discoveries on CRC-related outcomes and how to effectively integrate them into daily practice. In this review, we aim to cover the current evidence surrounding CRC screening. We will further critically assess novel approaches under investigation, in an effort to differentiate promising innovations from mere novelties.

Artificial intelligence for characterization of diminutive colorectal polyps: A feasibility study comparing two computer-aided diagnosis systems

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) has potential in the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility of the real-time use of the computer-aided diagnosis system (CADx) AI for ColoRectal Polyps (AI4CRP) for the optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps and to compare the performance with CAD EYE^TM (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan). CADx influence on the optical diagnosis of an expert endoscopist was also investigated.

METHODS

AI4CRP was developed in-house and CAD EYE was proprietary software provided by Fujifilm. Both CADx-systems exploit convolutional neural networks. Colorectal polyps were characterized as benign or premalignant and histopathology was used as gold standard. AI4CRP provided an objective assessment of its characterization by presenting a calibrated confidence characterization value (range 0.0-1.0). A predefined cut-off value of 0.6 was set with values < 0.6 indicating benign and values ≥ 0.6 indicating premalignant colorectal polyps. Low confidence characterizations were defined as values 40% around the cut-off value of 0.6 (< 0.36 and > 0.76). Self-critical AI4CRP’s diagnostic performances excluded low confidence characterizations.

RESULTS

AI4CRP use was feasible and performed on 30 patients with 51 colorectal polyps. Self-critical AI4CRP, excluding 14 low confidence characterizations [27.5% (14/51)], had a diagnostic accuracy of 89.2%, sensitivity of 89.7%, and specificity of 87.5%, which was higher compared to AI4CRP. CAD EYE had a 83.7% diagnostic accuracy, 74.2% sensitivity, and 100.0% specificity. Diagnostic performances of the endoscopist alone (before AI) increased non-significantly after reviewing the CADx characterizations of both AI4CRP and CAD EYE (AI-assisted endoscopist). Diagnostic performances of the AI-assisted endoscopist were higher compared to both CADx-systems, except for specificity for which CAD EYE performed best.

CONCLUSION

Real-time use of AI4CRP was feasible. Objective confidence values provided by a CADx is novel and self-critical AI4CRP showed higher diagnostic performances compared to AI4CRP.

Impact of computer-aided characterization for diagnosis of colorectal lesions, including sessile serrated lesions: Multireader, multicase study

OBJECTIVES

Computer-aided characterization (CADx) may be used to implement optical biopsy strategies into colonoscopy practice; however, its impact on endoscopic diagnosis remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the additional diagnostic value of CADx when used by endoscopists for assessing colorectal polyps.

METHODS

This was a single-center, multicase, multireader, image-reading study using randomly extracted images of pathologically confirmed polyps resected between July 2021 and January 2022. Approved CADx that could predict two-tier classification (neoplastic or nonneoplastic) by analyzing narrow-band images of the polyps was used to obtain a CADx diagnosis. Participating endoscopists determined if the polyps were neoplastic or not and noted their confidence level using a computer-based, image-reading test. The test was conducted twice with a 4-week interval: the first test was conducted without CADx prediction and the second test with CADx prediction. Diagnostic performances for neoplasms were calculated using the pathological diagnosis as reference and performances with and without CADx prediction were compared.

RESULTS

Five hundred polyps were randomly extracted from 385 patients and diagnosed by 14 endoscopists (including seven experts). The sensitivity for neoplasia was significantly improved by referring to CADx (89.4% vs. 95.6%). CADx also had incremental effects on the negative predictive value (69.3% vs. 84.3%), overall accuracy (87.2% vs. 91.8%), and high-confidence diagnosis rate (77.4% vs. 85.8%). However, there was no significant difference in specificity (80.1% vs. 78.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Computer-aided characterization has added diagnostic value for differentiating colorectal neoplasms and may improve the high-confidence diagnosis rate.

Training in basic gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement

This ESGE Position Statement provides structured and evidence-based guidance on the essential requirements and processes involved in training in basic gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. The document outlines definitions; competencies required, and means to their assessment and maintenance; the structure and requirements of training programs; patient safety and medicolegal issues. 1:  ESGE and ESGENA define basic endoscopic procedures as those procedures that are commonly indicated, generally accessible, and expected to be mastered (technically and cognitively) by the end of any core training program in gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2:  ESGE and ESGENA consider the following as basic endoscopic procedures: diagnostic upper and lower GI endoscopy, as well as a limited range of interventions such as: tissue acquisition via cold biopsy forceps, polypectomy for lesions ≤ 10 mm, hemostasis techniques, enteral feeding tube placement, foreign body retrieval, dilation of simple esophageal strictures, and India ink tattooing of lesion location. 3:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that training in GI endoscopy should be subject to stringent formal requirements that ensure all ESGE key performance indicators (KPIs) are met. 4:  Training in basic endoscopic procedures is a complex process and includes the development and acquisition of cognitive, technical/motor, and integrative skills. Therefore, ESGE and ESGENA recommend the use of validated tools to track the development of skills and assess competence. 5:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend incorporating a multimodal approach to evaluating competence in basic GI endoscopic procedures, including procedural thresholds and the measurement and documentation of established ESGE KPIs. 7:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend the continuous monitoring of ESGE KPIs during GI endoscopy training to ensure the trainee's maintenance of competence. 9:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy training units fulfil the ESGE KPIs for endoscopy units and, furthermore, be capable of providing the dedicated personnel, infrastructure, and sufficient case volume required for successful training within a structured training program. 10:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that trainers in basic GI endoscopic procedures should be endoscopists with formal educational training in the teaching of endoscopy, which allows them to successfully and safely teach trainees.

Computer-aided polyp characterization in colonoscopy: sufficient performance or not?

Computer-assisted polyp characterization (computer-aided diagnosis, CADx) facilitates optical diagnosis during colonoscopy. Several studies have demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity of CADx tools in identifying neoplastic changes in colorectal polyps. To implement CADx tools in colonoscopy, there is a need to confirm whether these tools satisfy the threshold levels that are required to introduce optical diagnosis strategies such as "diagnose-and-leave," "resect-and-discard" or "DISCARD-lite." In this article, we review the available data from prospective trials regarding the effect of multiple CADx tools and discuss whether they meet these thresholds.

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).

Precision endoscopy in the era of climate change and sustainability

Global warming caused by increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has a direct impact on human health. Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy contributes significantly to GHG emissions due to energy consumption, reprocessing of endoscopes and accessories, production of equipment, safe disposal of biohazardous waste, and travel by patients. Moreover, GHGs are also generated in histopathology through tissue processing and the production of biopsy specimen bottles. The reduction in unnecessary surveillance endoscopies and biopsies is a practical approach to decrease GHG emissions without affecting disease outcomes. This narrative review explores the role of precision medicine in GI endoscopy, such as image-enhanced endoscopy and artificial intelligence, with a focus on decreasing unnecessary endoscopic procedures and biopsies in the surveillance and diagnosis of premalignant lesions in the esophagus, stomach, and colon. This review offers strategies to minimize unnecessary endoscopic procedures and biopsies, decrease GHG emissions, and maintain high-quality patient care, thereby contributing to sustainable healthcare practices.

Third Eye? The Assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Endoscopy of Gastrointestinal Neoplasms

Gastrointestinal cancers are characterized by high incidence and mortality. However, there are well-established methods of screening. The endoscopy exam provides the macroscopical image and enables harvesting the tissue samples for further histopathological diagnosis. The efficiency of endoscopies relies not only on proper patient preparation, but also on the skills of the personnel conducting the exam. In recent years, a number of reports concerning the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine have arisen. Numerous studies aimed to assess the utility of deep learning/ neural network systems supporting endoscopies. In this review, we summarized the most recent reports and randomized clinical trials regarding the application of AI in screening and surveillance of gastrointestinal cancers among patients suffering from esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancer, along with the advantages, limitations, and controversies of those novel solutions.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Lesion Detection and Lesion Characterization

Colorectal cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide, despite the widespread uptake of population surveillance strategies. This is in part due to the persistent development of 'interval colorectal cancers', where patients develop colorectal cancer despite appropriate surveillance intervals, implying pre-malignant polyps were not resected at a prior colonoscopy. Multiple techniques have been developed to improve the sensitivity and accuracy of lesion detection and characterisation in an effort to improve the efficacy of colorectal cancer screening, thereby reducing the incidence of interval colorectal cancers. This article presents a comprehensive review of the transformative role of artificial intelligence (AI), which has recently emerged as one such solution for improving the quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. Firstly, AI-driven algorithms demonstrate remarkable potential in addressing the challenge of overlooked polyps, particularly polyp subtypes infamous for escaping human detection because of their inconspicuous appearance. Secondly, AI empowers gastroenterologists without exhaustive training in advanced mucosal imaging to characterise polyps with accuracy similar to that of expert interventionalists, reducing the dependence on pathologic evaluation and guiding appropriate resection techniques or referrals for more complex resections. AI in colonoscopy holds the potential to advance the detection and characterisation of polyps, addressing current limitations and improving patient outcomes. The integration of AI technologies into routine colonoscopy represents a promising step towards more effective colorectal cancer screening and prevention.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Prospective Real-Time Histological Prediction of Colorectal Lesions during Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Artificial intelligence (AI) presents a novel platform for improving disease diagnosis. However, the clinical utility of AI remains limited to discovery studies, with poor translation to clinical practice. Current data suggests that 26% of diminutive pre-malignant lesions and 3.5% of colorectal cancers are missed during colonoscopies. The primary aim of this study was to explore the role of artificial intelligence in real-time histological prediction of colorectal lesions during colonoscopy. A systematic search using MeSH headings relating to "AI", "machine learning", "computer-aided", "colonoscopy", and "colon/rectum/colorectal" identified 2290 studies. Thirteen studies reporting real-time analysis were included. A total of 2958 patients with 5908 colorectal lesions were included. A meta-analysis of six studies reporting sensitivities (95% CI) demonstrated that endoscopist diagnosis was superior to a computer-assisted detection platform, although no statistical significance was reached (p = 0.43). AI applications have shown encouraging results in differentiating neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions using narrow-band imaging, white light imaging, and blue light imaging. Other modalities include autofluorescence imaging and elastic scattering microscopy. The current literature demonstrates that despite the promise of new endoscopic AI models, they remain inferior to expert endoscopist diagnosis. There is a need to focus developments on real-time histological predictions prior to clinical translation to demonstrate improved diagnostic capabilities and time efficiency.

Artificial intelligence for gastroenterology: Singapore artificial intelligence for Gastroenterology Working Group Position Statement

BACKGROUND

Successful implementation of artificial intelligence in gastroenterology and hepatology practice requires more than technology. There are ethical, legal, and social issues that need to be settled.

AIM

A group consisting of AI developers (engineer), AI users (gastroenterologist, hepatologist, and surgeon) and AI regulators (ethicist and administrator) formed a Working Group to draft these Positions Statements with the objective of arousing public and professional interest and dialogue, to promote ethical considerations when implementing AI technology, to suggest to policy makers and health authorities relevant factors to take into account when approving and regulating the use of AI tools, and to engage the profession in preparing for change in clinical practice.

STATEMENTS

These series of Position Statements point out the salient issues to maintain the trust between care provider and care receivers, and to legitimize the use of a non-human tool in healthcare delivery. It is based on fundamental principles such as respect, autonomy, privacy, responsibility, and justice. Enforcing the use of AI without considering these factor risk damaging the doctor-patient relationship.

Accuracy of polyp characterization by artificial intelligence and endoscopists: a prospective, non-randomized study in a tertiary endoscopy center

Background and study aims Artificial intelligence (AI) in gastrointestinal endoscopy is developing very fast. Computer-aided detection of polyps and computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for polyp characterization are available now. This study was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a new commercially available CADx system in clinical practice. Patients and methods This prospective, non-randomized study was performed at a tertiary academic endoscopy center from March to August 2022. We included patients receiving a colonoscopy. Polypectomy had to be performed in all polyps. Every patient was examined concurrently by an endoscopist and AI using two opposing screens. The AI system, overseen by a second observer, was not visible to the endoscopist. The primary outcome was accuracy of the AI classifying the polyps into "neoplastic" and "non-neoplastic." The secondary outcome was accuracy of the classification by the endoscopists. Sessile serrated lesions were classified as neoplastic. Results We included 156 patients (mean age 65; 57 women) with 262 polyps ≤10 mm. Eighty-four were hyperplastic polyps (32.1%), 158 adenomas (60.3%), seven sessile serrated lesions (2.7%) and 13 other entities (normal/inflammatory colonmucosa, lymphoidic polyp) (4.9%) on histological diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of AI were 89.70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.02%-93.88%), 75.26% (95% CI: 65.46%-83.46%) and 84.35% (95% CI:79.38%-88.53%), respectively. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for less experienced endoscopists (2-5 years of endoscopy) were 95.56% (95% CI: 84.85%-99.46%), 61.54% (95% CI: 40.57%-79.77%) and 83.10% (95% CI: 72.34%-90.95%) and for experienced endoscopists 90.83% (95% CI: 84.19%-95.33%), 71.83% (95% CI: 59.90%-81.87%) and 83.77% (95% CI: 77.76%-88.70%), respectively. Conclusion Accuracy for polyp characterization by a new commercially available AI system is high, but does not fulfill the criteria for a "resect-and-discard" strategy.

Real-World Validation of a Computer-Aided Diagnosis System for Prediction of Polyp Histology in Colonoscopy: A Prospective Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) of polyp histology could support endoscopists in clinical decision-making. However, this has not been validated in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, multicenter study comparing CADx and endoscopist predictions of polyp histology in real-time colonoscopy. Optical diagnosis based on visual inspection of polyps was made by experienced endoscopists. After this, the automated output from the CADx support tool was recorded. All imaged polyps were resected for histological assessment. Primary outcome was difference in diagnostic performance between CADx and endoscopist prediction of polyp histology. Subgroup analysis was performed for polyp size, bowel preparation, difficulty of location of the polyps, and endoscopist experience.

RESULTS

A total of 661 eligible polyps were resected in 320 patients aged ≥40 years between March 2021 and July 2022. CADx had an overall accuracy of 71.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 68.0-75.0), compared with 75.2% (95% CI 71.7-78.4) for endoscopists ( P = 0.023). The sensitivity of CADx for neoplastic polyps was 61.8% (95% CI 56.9-66.5), compared with 70.3% (95% CI 65.7-74.7) for endoscopists ( P < 0.001). The interobserver agreement between CADx and endoscopist predictions of polyp histology was moderate (83.1% agreement, κ 0.661). When there was concordance between CADx and endoscopist predictions, the accuracy increased to 78.1%.

DISCUSSION

The overall diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for neoplastic polyps was higher in experienced endoscopists compared with CADx predictions, with moderate interobserver agreement. Concordance in predictions increased this diagnostic accuracy. Further research is required to improve the performance of CADx and to establish its role in clinical practice.

Computer-aided diagnosis for optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps including sessile serrated lesions: a real-time comparison with screening endoscopists

BACKGROUND : We aimed to compare the accuracy of the optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps, including sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), between a computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) system and endoscopists during real-time colonoscopy. METHODS : We developed the POLyp Artificial Recognition (POLAR) system, which was capable of performing real-time characterization of diminutive colorectal polyps. For pretraining, the Microsoft-COCO dataset with over 300 000 nonpolyp object images was used. For training, eight hospitals prospectively collected 2637 annotated images from 1339 polyps (i. e. publicly available online POLAR database). For clinical validation, POLAR was tested during colonoscopy in patients with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and compared with the performance of 20 endoscopists from eight hospitals. Endoscopists were blinded to the POLAR output. Primary outcome was the comparison of accuracy of the optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps between POLAR and endoscopists (neoplastic [adenomas and SSLs] versus non-neoplastic [hyperplastic polyps]). Histopathology served as the reference standard. RESULTS : During clinical validation, 423 diminutive polyps detected in 194 FIT-positive individuals were included for analysis (300 adenomas, 41 SSLs, 82 hyperplastic polyps). POLAR distinguished neoplastic from non-neoplastic lesions with 79 % accuracy, 89 % sensitivity, and 38 % specificity. The endoscopists achieved 83 % accuracy, 92 % sensitivity, and 44 % specificity. The optical diagnosis accuracy between POLAR and endoscopists was not significantly different (P = 0.10). The proportion of polyps in which POLAR was able to provide an optical diagnosis was 98 % (i. e. success rate). CONCLUSIONS : We developed a CADx system that differentiated neoplastic from non-neoplastic diminutive polyps during endoscopy, with an accuracy comparable to that of screening endoscopists and near-perfect success rate.

Artificial intelligence in digestive endoscopy: recent advances

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the incessant advances in information technology and its implications in all domains of our life, artificial intelligence (AI) started to emerge as a need for better machine performance. How it can help endoscopists and what are the areas of interest in improving both diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy in each part of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. What are the recent benefits and clinical usefulness of this new technology in daily endoscopic practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

The two main AI systems categories are computer-assisted detection 'CADe' for lesion detection and computer-assisted diagnosis 'CADx' for optical biopsy and lesion characterization. Multiple softwares are now implemented in endoscopy practice. Other AI systems offer therapeutic assistance such as lesion delineation for complete endoscopic resection or prediction of possible lymphanode after endoscopic treatment. Quality assurance is the coming step with complete monitoring of high-quality colonoscopy. In all cases it is a computer-aid endoscopy as the overall result rely on the physician. Video capsule endoscopy is the unique example were the computer conduct the device, store multiple images, and perform accurate diagnosis.

SUMMARY

AI is a breakthrough in digestive endoscopy. Screening gastric and colonic cancer detection should be improved especially outside of expert's centers. Prospective and multicenter trials are mandatory before introducing new software in clinical practice.

Recent advances in devices and technologies that might prove revolutionary for colonoscopy procedures

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Adenoma detection rate (ADR), a quality indicator for colonoscopy, has gained prominence as it is inversely related to CRC incidence and mortality. As such, recent efforts have focused on developing novel colonoscopy devices and technologies to improve ADR.

AREAS COVERED

The main objective of this paper is to provide an overview of advancements in the fields of colonoscopy mechanical attachments, artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy, and colonoscopy optical enhancements with respect to ADR. We accomplished this by performing a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases from inception to September 2023. This review is intended to be an introduction to colonoscopy devices and technologies.

EXPERT OPINION

Numerous mechanical attachments and optical enhancements have been developed that have the potential to improve ADR and AI has gone from being an inaccessible concept to a feasible means for improving ADR. While these advances are exciting and portend a change in what will be considered standard colonoscopy, they continue to require refinement. Future studies should focus on combining modalities to further improve ADR and exploring the use of these technologies in other facets of colonoscopy.

Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly growing field in gastrointestinal endoscopy, and its potential applications are virtually endless, with studies demonstrating use of AI for early gastric cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, Barrett's esophagus, capsule endoscopy, as well as other areas in gastroenterology. Much of the early studies and applications of AI in gastroenterology have revolved around colonoscopy, particularly with regards to real-time polyp detection and characterization. This review will cover much of the existing data on computer-aided detection (CADe), computer-aided diagnosis (CADx), and briefly discuss some other interesting applications of AI for colonoscopy, while also considering some of the challenges and limitations that exist around the use of AI for colonoscopy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple randomized controlled trials have now been published which show a statistically significant improvement when using AI to improve adenoma detection and reduce adenoma miss rates during colonoscopy. There is also a growing pool of literature showing that AI can be helpful for characterizing/diagnosing colorectal polyps in real time. AI has also shown promise in other areas of colonoscopy, including polyp sizing and automated measurement and monitoring of quality metrics during colonoscopy. AI is a promising tool that has the ability to shape the future of gastrointestinal endoscopy, with much of the early data showing significant benefits to use of AI during colonoscopy. However, there remain several challenges that may delay or hamper the widespread use of AI in the field.

Artificial Intelligence Applied to Colonoscopy: Is It Time to Take a Step Forward?

Growing evidence indicates that artificial intelligence (AI) applied to medicine is here to stay. In gastroenterology, AI computer vision applications have been stated as a research priority. The two main AI system categories are computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) and computer-assisted diagnosis (CADx). However, other fields of expansion are those related to colonoscopy quality, such as methods to objectively assess colon cleansing during the colonoscopy, as well as devices to automatically predict and improve bowel cleansing before the examination, predict deep submucosal invasion, obtain a reliable measurement of colorectal polyps and accurately locate colorectal lesions in the colon. Although growing evidence indicates that AI systems could improve some of these quality metrics, there are concerns regarding cost-effectiveness, and large and multicentric randomized studies with strong outcomes, such as post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, are lacking. The integration of all these tasks into one quality-improvement device could facilitate the incorporation of AI systems in clinical practice. In this manuscript, the current status of the role of AI in colonoscopy is reviewed, as well as its current applications, drawbacks and areas for improvement.

Artificial Intelligence-Aided Endoscopy and Colorectal Cancer Screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, with the highest incidence reported in high-income countries. However, because of the slow progression of neoplastic precursors, along with the opportunity for their endoscopic detection and resection, a well-designed endoscopic screening program is expected to strongly decrease colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. In this regard, quality of colonoscopy has been clearly related with the risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Recently, the development of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in the medical field has been growing in interest. Through machine learning processes, and, more recently, deep learning, if a very high numbers of learning samples are available, AI systems may automatically extract specific features from endoscopic images/videos without human intervention, helping the endoscopists in different aspects of their daily practice. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on AI-aided endoscopy, and to outline its potential role in colorectal cancer prevention.

Benefits and challenges in implementation of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: World Endoscopy Organization position statement

The number of artificial intelligence (AI) tools for colonoscopy on the market is increasing with supporting clinical evidence. Nevertheless, their implementation is not going smoothly for a variety of reasons, including lack of data on clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness, lack of trustworthy guidelines, uncertain indications, and cost for implementation. To address this issue and better guide practitioners, the World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) has provided its perspective about the status of AI in colonoscopy as the position statement. WEO Position Statement: Statement 1.1: Computer-aided detection (CADe) for colorectal polyps is likely to improve colonoscopy effectiveness by reducing adenoma miss rates and thus increase adenoma detection; Statement 1.2: In the short term, use of CADe is likely to increase health-care costs by detecting more adenomas; Statement 1.3: In the long term, the increased cost by CADe could be balanced by savings in costs related to cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, palliative care) due to CADe-related cancer prevention; Statement 1.4: Health-care delivery systems and authorities should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CADe to support its use in clinical practice; Statement 2.1: Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), when it has sufficient accuracy, is expected to reduce health-care costs by reducing polypectomies, pathological examinations, or both; Statement 2.2: Health-care delivery systems and authorities should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CADx to support its use in clinical practice; Statement 3: We recommend that a broad range of high-quality cost-effectiveness research should be undertaken to understand whether AI implementation benefits populations and societies in different health-care systems.

Artificial intelligence and inflammatory bowel disease: Where are we going?

Inflammatory bowel diseases, namely ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, are chronic and relapsing conditions that pose a growing burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Because of their complex and partly unknown etiology and pathogenesis, the management of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease can prove challenging not only from a clinical point of view but also for resource optimization. Artificial intelligence, an umbrella term that encompasses any cognitive function developed by machines for learning or problem solving, and its subsets machine learning and deep learning are becoming ever more essential tools with a plethora of applications in most medical specialties. In this regard gastroenterology is no exception, and due to the importance of endoscopy and imaging numerous clinical studies have been gradually highlighting the relevant role that artificial intelligence has in inflammatory bowel diseases as well. The aim of this review was to summarize the most recent evidence on the use of artificial intelligence in inflammatory bowel diseases in various contexts such as diagnosis, follow-up, treatment, prognosis, cancer surveillance, data collection, and analysis. Moreover, insights into the potential further developments in this field and their effects on future clinical practice were discussed.

Expected value of artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

This ESGE Position Statement defines the expected value of artificial intelligence (AI) for the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal neoplasia within the framework of the performance measures already defined by ESGE. This is based on the clinical relevance of the expected task and the preliminary evidence regarding artificial intelligence in artificial or clinical settings. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS:: (1) For acceptance of AI in assessment of completeness of upper GI endoscopy, the adequate level of mucosal inspection with AI should be comparable to that assessed by experienced endoscopists. (2) For acceptance of AI in assessment of completeness of upper GI endoscopy, automated recognition and photodocumentation of relevant anatomical landmarks should be obtained in ≥90% of the procedures. (3) For acceptance of AI in the detection of Barrett's high grade intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer, the AI-assisted detection rate for suspicious lesions for targeted biopsies should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists with or without advanced imaging techniques. (4) For acceptance of AI in the management of Barrett's neoplasia, AI-assisted selection of lesions amenable to endoscopic resection should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists. (5) For acceptance of AI in the diagnosis of gastric precancerous conditions, AI-assisted diagnosis of atrophy and intestinal metaplasia should be comparable to that provided by the established biopsy protocol, including the estimation of extent, and consequent allocation to the correct endoscopic surveillance interval. (6) For acceptance of artificial intelligence for automated lesion detection in small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), the performance of AI-assisted reading should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists for lesion detection, without increasing but possibly reducing the reading time of the operator. (7) For acceptance of AI in the detection of colorectal polyps, the AI-assisted adenoma detection rate should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists. (8) For acceptance of AI optical diagnosis (computer-aided diagnosis [CADx]) of diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), AI-assisted characterization should match performance standards for implementing resect-and-discard and diagnose-and-leave strategies. (9) For acceptance of AI in the management of polyps ≥ 6 mm, AI-assisted characterization should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists in selecting lesions amenable to endoscopic resection.