Colon polyp detection using linked color imaging compared to white light imaging: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy of texture and color enhancement imaging for the visibility and diagnostic accuracy of non-polypoid colorectal lesions

Objective

A newly launched endoscopy system (EVIS X1, CV-1500; Olympus) is equipped with texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI). We aimed to investigate the efficacy of TXI for the visibility and diagnostic accuracy of non-polypoid colorectal lesions.

Methods

We examined 100 non-polypoid lesions in 42 patients from the same position, angle, and distance of the view in three modes: white light imaging (WLI), narrow-band imaging (NBI), and TXI. The primary outcome was to compare polyp visibility in the three modes using subjective polyp visibility score and objective color difference values. The secondary outcome was to compare the diagnostic accuracy without magnification.

Results

Overall, the visibility score of TXI was significantly higher than that of WLI (3.7 ± 1.1 vs. 3.6 ± 1.1; p = 0.008) and lower than that of NBI (3.7 ± 1.1 vs. 3.8 ± 1.1; p = 0.013). Color difference values of TXI were higher than those of WLI (11.5 ± 6.9 vs. 9.1 ± 5.4; p < 0.001) and lower than those of NBI (11.5 ± 6.9 vs. 13.1 ± 7.7; p = 0.002). No significant differences in TXI and NBI (visibility score: 3.7 ± 1.0 vs. 3.8 ± 1.1; p = 0.833, color difference values: 11.6 ± 7.1 vs. 12.9 ± 8.3; p = 0.099) were observed for neoplastic lesions. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy of TXI was significantly higher than that of NBI (65.5% vs. 57.6%, p = 0.012) for neoplastic lesions.

Conclusions

TXI demonstrated higher visibility than that of WLI and lower than that of NBI. Further investigations are warranted to validate the performance of the TXI mode comprehensively.

Validation of Artificial Intelligence Computer-Aided Detection of Colonic Neoplasm in Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Controlling colonoscopic quality is important in the detection of colon polyps during colonoscopy as it reduces the overall long-term colorectal cancer risk. Artificial intelligence has recently been introduced in various medical fields. In this study, we aimed to validate a previously developed artificial intelligence (AI) computer-aided detection (CADe) algorithm called ALPHAON® and compare outcomes with previous studies that showed that AI outperformed and assisted endoscopists of diverse levels of expertise in detecting colon polyps.

METHODS

We used the retrospective data of 500 still images, including 100 polyp images and 400 healthy colon images. In addition, we validated the CADe algorithm and compared its diagnostic performance with that of two expert endoscopists and six trainees from Gachon University Gil Medical Center. After a washing-out period of over 2 weeks, endoscopists performed polyp detection on the same dataset with the assistance of ALPHAON®.

RESULTS

The CADe algorithm presented a high capability in detecting colon polyps, with an accuracy of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96 to 0.99), sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.97), specificity of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99), and AUC of 0.967. When evaluating and comparing the polyp detection ability of ALPHAON® with that of endoscopists with different levels of expertise (regarding years of endoscopic experience), it was found that ALPHAON® outperformed the experts in accuracy (0.97, 95% CI: 0.96 to 0.99), sensitivity (0.91, 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.97), and specificity (0.99, 95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99). After a washing-out period of over 2 weeks, the overall capability significantly improved for both experts and trainees with the assistance of ALPHAON®.

CONCLUSIONS

The high performance of the CADe algorithm system in colon polyp detection during colonoscopy was verified. The sensitivity of ALPHAON® led to it outperforming the experts, and it demonstrated the ability to enhance the polyp detection ability of both experts and trainees, which suggests a significant possibility of ALPHAON® being able to provide endoscopic assistance.

Additional 30-second observation of the right-sided colon for missed polyp detection with linked color imaging compared with narrow band imaging

Background and study aims We previously demonstrated the efficacy of an additional-30-seconds (Add-30s) observation with linked color imaging (LCI) or narrow band imaging (NBI) of the cecum and ascending colon (right-sided colon) after white light imaging (WLI) observation for improving adenoma detection rate (ADR) by 3% to 10%. We herein compared Add-30s LCI with Add-30s NBI in a large number of cases. Patients and methods We retrospectively collected 1023 and 1011 cases with Add-30s LCI and NBI observation for right-sided colon in 11 affiliated institutions from 2018 to 2022 and propensity score matching was performed. Add-30s observation was as follows. First observation: WLI observation of the right-sided colon as first observation. Second observation: Reobservation of right-sided colon by Add-30s LCI or NBI. The comparison of the mean numbers of adenoma+sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) and adenomas per patient (MASP and MUTYH-associated polyposis) were analyzed in the Add-30s LCI/NBI groups. The increase in right-sided ADR was also analyzed in the groups. Results Among 748 matched cases in the Add-30s LCI/NBI groups, the MASP and MAP were 0.18/0.19 ( P = 0.54) and 0.14/0.15 ( P = 0.70). Among experts, they were 0.17/0.22 ( P = 0.16) and 0.15/0.21 ( P = 0.08). Among non-experts, they were 0.13/0.12 ( P = 0.71) and 0.12/0.07 ( P = 0.04). The right-sided ADRs of the first+second observations in the LCI and NBI groups were 32.2% and 28.9% ( P = 0.16) and the increase of ADRs were 7.5% and 7.2% ( P = 0.84). Conclusions In right-sided colon, the detection of adenoma/SSL did not differ between Add-30s LCI and NBI. Both of them significantly increased ADR.

Impact of linked color imaging on the proximal adenoma miss rate: a multicenter tandem randomized controlled trial (the COCORICO trial)

BACKGROUND

Missed lesions are common during standard colonoscopy and are correlated with post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Contrast-enhanced technologies have recently been developed to improve polyp detection. We aimed to evaluate the impact of linked color imaging (LCI) on the proximal adenoma miss rate in routine colonoscopy.

METHODS

This national, multicenter, tandem, randomized trial compared the outcomes of colonoscopy with white-light imaging (WLI) versus LCI for polyp detection in the right colon. Two consecutive examinations of the right colon (upstream of the hepatic flexure) were made with WLI and LCI by the same operator. First-pass examination by WLI or LCI was randomized 1:1 after cecal intubation. According to statistical calculations, 10 endoscopy units had to include approximately 700 patients. The primary outcome was proximal adenoma miss rate. Secondary outcomes were the proximal miss rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL), advanced adenomas, and polyps.

RESULTS

764 patients were included from 1 January 2020 to 22 December 2022, and 686 patients were randomized (345 WLI first vs. 341 LCI first). Both groups were comparable in terms of demographics and indications. The proximal adenoma miss rate was not significantly higher in the WLI-first group (36.7%) vs. the LCI-first group (31.8%) (estimated mean absolute difference: 4.9% [95%CI -5.2% to 15.0%], P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in miss rates for SSLs, advanced adenomas, and polyps in the proximal colon.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to previous data, this study does not support the benefit of LCI to the proximal adenoma miss rate in routine colonoscopy.

Practical utility of linked color imaging in colonoscopy: Updated literature review

The remarkable recent developments in image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) have significantly contributed to the advancement of diagnostic techniques. Linked color imaging (LCI) is an IEE technique in which color differences are expanded by processing image data to enhance short-wavelength narrow-band light. This feature of LCI causes reddish areas to appear redder and whitish areas to appear whiter. Because most colorectal lesions, such as neoplastic and inflammatory lesions, have a reddish tone, LCI is an effective tool for identifying colorectal lesions by clarifying the redder areas and distinguishing them from the surrounding normal mucosa. To date, eight randomized controlled trials have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of LCI in identifying colorectal adenomatous lesions. The results of a meta-analysis integrating these studies demonstrated that LCI was superior to white-light endoscopy for detecting colorectal adenomatous lesions. LCI also improves the detection of serrated lesions by enhancing their whiteness. Furthermore, accumulating evidence suggests that LCI is superior to white-light endoscopy for the diagnosis of the colonic mucosa in patients with ulcerative colitis. In this review, based on a comprehensive search of the current literature since the implementation of LCI, the utility of LCI in the detection and diagnosis of colorectal lesions is discussed. Additionally, the latest data, including attempts to combine artificial intelligence and LCI, are presented.

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.

Investigation of the relationship between colonoscopy insertion difficulty factors and endoscope shape using an endoscopic position detection unit

In this study, we investigated the relationship between the cecal intubation time (CIT) and the form and method used for passing through the sigmoid/descending colon junction (SDJ) and the hepatic flexure using an endoscopic position detection unit (UPD), with reference to various factors [age, sex, body mass index (BMI), history of abdominal and pelvic surgery, and diverticulum]. A total of 152 patients underwent colonoscopy with UPD. The mean age was 66.9 ± 12.4 years, and the male to female ratio was 3.6:1. The average CIT time was 14.3 ± 8.2 min. Age, number of experienced endoscopies, history of abdominal and pelvic surgery, BMI, and diverticulum were associated with prolonged CIT; SDJ passage pattern was straight: 8.6 ± 5.0, alpha loop: 11.8 ± 5.6, puzzle ring-like loop: 20.2 ± 5.0, reverse alpha loop: 22.4 ± 9.7, and other loop: 24.7 ± 10.5. The hepatic flexure passing method was in the following order: right rotation maneuver: 12.6 ± 6.6, push maneuver: 15.1 ± 5.9, and right rotation with positional change maneuver: 20.5 ± 7.2. In conclusion, colonoscopy with UPD revealed an association between CIT and SDJ passage pattern and hepatic flexure passing method.

Linked-color imaging with or without artificial intelligence for adenoma detection: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important indicator of colonoscopy quality and colorectal cancer incidence. Both linked-color imaging (LCI) with artificial intelligence (LCA) and LCI alone increase adenoma detection during colonoscopy, although it remains unclear whether one modality is superior. This study compared ADR between LCA and LCI alone, including according to endoscopists' experience (experts and trainees) and polyp size.

METHODS

Patients undergoing colonoscopy for positive fecal immunochemical tests, follow-up of colon polyps, and abdominal symptoms at a single institution were randomly assigned to the LCA or LCI group. ADR, adenoma per colonoscopy (APC), cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, number of adenomas per location, and adenoma size were compared.

RESULTS

The LCA (n=400) and LCI (n=400) groups showed comparable cecal intubation and withdrawal times. The LCA group showed a significantly higher ADR (58.8% vs. 43.5%; P<0.001) and mean (95%CI) APC (1.31 [1.15 to 1.47] vs. 0.94 [0.80 to 1.07]; P<0.001), particularly in the ascending colon (0.30 [0.24 to 0.36] vs. 0.20 [0.15 to 0.25]; P=0.02). Total number of nonpolypoid-type adenomas was also significantly higher in the LCA group (0.15 [0.09 to 0.20] vs. 0.08 [0.05 to 0.10]; P=0.02). Small polyps (≤5, 6-9mm) were detected significantly more frequently in the LCA group (0.75 [0.64 to 0.86] vs. 0.48 [0.40 to 0.57], P<0.001 and 0.34 [0.26 to 0.41] vs. 0.24 [0.18 to 0.29], P=0.04, respectively). In both groups, ADR was not significantly different between experts and trainees.

CONCLUSIONS

LCA was significantly superior to LCI alone in terms of ADR.

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.

Adherence to endoscopic surveillance guidelines for patients with inflammatory bowel disease: An Australian cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease have an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer as compared with the general population. Endoscopic surveillance to detect early dysplastic changes is advised by several published clinical guidelines, which provide recommendations as to the timing and performance of surveillance procedures. There is a paucity of data as to adherence with these guidelines in clinical practice.

METHODS

A longitudinal inception cohort study of all new patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease across a service network of Australian hospitals between January 2005 and June 2014, with continuous follow-up in a gastroenterology clinic until December 31, 2022. Patients were included if they warranted surveillance according to the Australian guidelines. Adherence to guidelines and technical and quality measures were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients were included, and a total of 263 surveillance procedures were performed. Ninety-five patients (70%) had their first surveillance colonoscopy within the correct time interval. Fifty patients (37%) were completely adherent to guidelines with respect to timing of all surveillance procedure. The overall dysplasia detection rate for surveillance procedures was 10%. Chromoendoscopy was only performed in 16% of procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to endoscopic surveillance guidelines with regard to timing of procedures and the utilization of chromoendoscopy is poor. Further clinician education, promotion of the surveillance guidelines and incorporation of chromoendoscopy training as part of the national colonoscopy training program may improve adherence to guidelines.

Improved visibility of colorectal tumor by texture and color enhancement imaging with indigo carmine

BACKGROUND

Accurate diagnosis and early resection of colorectal polyps are important to prevent the occurrence of colorectal cancer. However, technical factors and morphological factors of polyps itself can lead to missed diagnoses. Image-enhanced endoscopy and chromoendoscopy (CE) have been developed to facilitate an accurate diagnosis. There have been no reports on visibility using a combination of texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI) and CE for colorectal tumors.

AIM

To investigate the visibility of margins and surfaces with the combination of TXI and CE for colorectal lesions.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who underwent lower gastrointestinal endoscopy at the Toyoshima Endoscopy Clinic. We extracted polyps that were resected and diagnosed as adenomas or serrated polyps (hyperplastic polyps and sessile serrated lesions) from our endoscopic database. An expert endoscopist performed the lower gastrointestinal endoscopies and observed the lesion using white light imaging (WLI), TXI, CE, and TXI + CE modalities. Indigo carmine dye was used for CE. Three expert endoscopists rated the visibility of the margin and surface patterns in four ranks, from 1 to 4. The primary outcomes were the average visibility scores for the margin and surface patterns based on the WLI, TXI, CE, and TXI + CE observations. Visibility scores between the four modalities were compared by the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients with 81 polyps were assessed. The histological subtypes included 50 tubular adenomas, 16 hyperplastic polyps, and 15 sessile serrated lesions. The visibility scores for the margins based on WLI, TXI, CE, and TXI + CE were 2.44 ± 0.93, 2.90 ± 0.93, 3.37 ± 0.74, and 3.75 ± 0.49, respectively. The visibility scores for the surface based on WLI, TXI, CE, and TXI + CE were 2.25 ± 0.80, 2.84 ± 0.84, 3.12 ± 0.72, and 3.51 ± 0.60, respectively. The visibility scores for the detection and surface on TXI were significantly lower than that on CE but higher than that on WLI (P < 0.001). The visibility scores for the margin and surface on TXI + CE were significantly higher than those on CE (P < 0.001). In the sub-analysis of adenomas, the visibility for the margin and surface on TXI + CE was significantly better than that on WLI, TXI, and CE (P < 0.001). In the sub-analysis of serrated polyps, the visibility for the margin and surface on TXI + CE was also significantly better than that on WLI, TXI, and CE (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TXI + CE enhanced the visibility of the margin and surface compared to WLI, TXI, and CE for colorectal lesions.

Linked color imaging versus white light imaging in the diagnosis of colorectal lesions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Miss rate of colorectal neoplasia is associated with lesion histology, size, morphology, or location.

Objectives

We aim to compare the efficacy of Linked color imaging (LCI) versus white light imaging (WLI) for adenoma detection rate (ADR), the detection of sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), serrated lesions (SLs), advanced adenomas (AAs), diminutive lesions (DLs), and flat lesions (FLs) by using per-patient and per-lesion analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources and methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched through May 1st, 2023. We calculated risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference for continuous outcomes, and performed sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses.

Results

Overall, 17 RCTs (10,624 patients) were included. In per-patient analysis, ADR was higher in the LCI group versus the WLI group (p < 0.00001). This effect was consistent for SSL (p = 0.005), SLs (p = 0.01), AAs (p = 0.04), DLs (p < 0.00001), and FLs (p < 0.0001). In per-lesion analysis, LCI showed a significant superiority over WLI with regard to the mean number of adenomas per patient (p < 0.00001). This effect was in accordance with mean SSL (p = 0.001), mean SLs (p < 0.00001), and mean DLs (p < 0.0001) per patient. A subgroup analysis showed that the beneficial effect of the LCI group on the detection of AAs, SSL, and FLs was maintained only for studies when experts and trainees were included but not for experts only.

Conclusions

Meta-analyses of RCTs data support the use of LCI in clinical practice, especially for trainees.

Usefulness of AI-Equipped Endoscopy for Detecting Colorectal Adenoma during Colonoscopy Screening: Confirm That Colon Neoplasm Finely Can Be Identified by AI without Overlooking Study (Confidential Study)

In the present prospective case series study, we investigated the lesion-detection ability of an AI-equipped colonoscopy as an addition to colonoscopy (CS) screening. Participants were 100 patients aged ≥20 years who had not undergone CS at the study site in the last 3 years and passed the exclusion criteria. CS procedures were conducted using conventional white light imaging and computer-aided detection (CADe). Adenoma detection rate (ADR; number of individuals with at least one adenoma detected) was compared between the conventional group and the CADe group. Of the 170 lesions identified, the ADR of the CADe group was significantly higher than the ADR of the conventional group (69% vs. 61%, p = 0.008). For the expert endoscopists, although ADR did not differ significantly, the mean number of detected adenomas per procedure (MAP) was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the conventional group (1.7 vs. 1.45, p = 0.034). For non-expert endoscopists, ADR and MAP were significantly higher in the CADe group than in the conventional group (ADR 69.5% vs. 56.6%, p = 0.016; MAP 1.66 vs. 1.11, p < 0.001). These results indicate that the CADe function in CS screening has a positive effect on adenoma detection, especially for non-experts.

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.

Performance of artificial intelligence in the characterization of colorectal lesions

Background

Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) has been used in the differentiation between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal lesions through microvasculature analysis. This study aimed to evaluate the computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) mode of the CAD EYE system for the optical diagnosis of colorectal lesions and compare it with the performance of an expert, in addition to evaluating the computer-aided detection (CADe) mode in terms of polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR).

Methods

A prospective study was conducted to evaluate the performance of CAD EYE using blue light imaging (BLI), dichotomizing lesions into hyperplastic and neoplastic, and of an expert based on the Japan Narrow-Band Imaging Expert Team (JNET) classification for the characterization of lesions. After white light imaging (WLI) diagnosis, magnification was used on all lesions, which were removed and examined histologically. Diagnostic criteria were evaluated, and PDR and ADR were calculated.

Results

A total of 110 lesions (80 (72.7%) dysplastic lesions and 30 (27.3%) nondysplastic lesions) were evaluated in 52 patients, with a mean lesion size of 4.3 mm. Artificial intelligence (AI) analysis showed 81.8% accuracy, 76.3% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity, 98.5% positive predictive value (PPV), and 60.4% negative predictive value (NPV). The kappa value was 0.61, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.87. Expert analysis showed 93.6% accuracy, 92.5% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity, 98.7% PPV, and 82.9% NPV. The kappa value was 0.85, and the AUC was 0.95. Overall, PDR was 67.6% and ADR was 45.9%.

Conclusions

The CADx mode showed good accuracy in characterizing colorectal lesions, but the expert assessment was superior in almost all diagnostic criteria. PDR and ADR were high.

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.

Advanced Imaging in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Literature Review of the Current State of the Art

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has known a great evolution in the last decades. Imaging techniques evolved from imaging with only standard white light endoscopes toward high-definition resolution endoscopes and the use of multiple color enhancement techniques, over to automated endoscopic assessment systems based on artificial intelligence. This narrative literature review aimed to provide a detailed overview on the latest evolutions within the field of advanced GI endoscopy, mainly focusing on the screening, diagnosis, and surveillance of common upper and lower GI pathology.

METHODS

This review comprises only literature about screening, diagnosis, and surveillance strategies using advanced endoscopic imaging techniques published in (inter)national peer-reviewed journals and written in English. Studies with only adult patients included were selected. A search was performed using MESH terms: dye-based chromoendoscopy, virtual chromoendoscopy, video enhancement technique, upper GI tract, lower GI tract, Barrett's esophagus, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, gastric cancer, colorectal polyps, inflammatory bowel disease, artificial intelligence. This review does not elaborate on the therapeutic application or impact of advanced GI endoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Focusing on current and future applications and evolutions in the field of both upper and lower GI advanced endoscopy, this overview is a practical but detailed projection of the latest developments. Within this review, an active leap toward artificial intelligence and its recent developments in GI endoscopy was made. Additionally, the literature is weighted against the current international guidelines and assessed for its potential positive future impact.

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.

Computer-aided detection, mucosal exposure device, their combination, and standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Computer-aided detection (CADe) and a mucosal exposure device can improve adenoma detection rate (ADR). Potential benefits of combining the 2 modalities have never been studied. This study aimed to compare ADR differences among CADe alone, endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) alone, and the combination of CADe and EAC (CADe+EAC) with standard colonoscopy.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled study included 1245 participants who underwent screening colonoscopy. Participants were randomized to CADe, EAC, CADe+EAC, and standard colonoscopy as a control. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were proximal ADR (pADR), advanced ADR (AADR), and the number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APCs).

RESULTS

ADRs from the control, CADe, EAC, and CADe+EAC groups were 41.9%, 52.2%, 54.0%, and 58.8%, respectively; pADRs were 25.2%, 33.3%, 34.9%, and 37.0%, respectively; AADRs were 7.7%, 8.3%, 8.3%, and 13.6%, respectively; and APCs were .76, 1.11, 1.18, and 1.31, respectively. Significant increases in ADR and pADR were observed between the intervention and control groups (P < .05 in all comparisons). The AADR was significantly higher only in the CADe+EAC group than in the control group (P = .02). The adjusted incidence rate ratios of APCs were significantly higher in the intervention groups versus the control group (P < .01 in all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

CADe+EAC significantly improve ADR and AADR over standard colonoscopy. However, although CADe or EAC alone can substantially increase the detection of adenomas, they do not lead to increased detection of advanced adenomas unless used in combination. (Clinical trial registration number: TCTR20200929003.).

Colorectal sessile serrated lesion detection using linked-color imaging versus narrow-band imaging: a parallel randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

 Previous studies have reported the effectiveness of narrow-band imaging (NBI) and linked-color imaging (LCI) in improving the detection of colorectal neoplasms. There has however been no direct comparison between LCI and NBI in the detection of colorectal sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of LCI and NBI in detecting colorectal SSLs.

METHODS

 A prospective, parallel, randomized controlled trial was conducted. The participants were randomly assigned to the LCI or NBI arms. The primary end point was the SSL detection rate (SDR).

RESULTS

 406 patients were involved; 204 in the LCI arm and 202 in the NBI arm. The total polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and SDR were 54.2 %, 38.7 %, and 10.8%, respectively. The SDR was not significantly different between the LCI and NBI arms (12.3 % vs. 9.4 %; P = 0.36). The differences in the detection rate and the per-patient number of polyps, adenomas, diminutive lesions, and flat lesions between LCI and NBI also were not statistically significant. Multivariate analysis showed that LCI and NBI were not independent factors associated with SDR, whereas Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score (odds ratio [OR] 1.35, 95 %CI 1.03-1.76; P = 0.03), withdrawal time (OR 1.13, 95 %CI 1.00-1.26; P = 0.04), and operator experience (OR 3.73, 95 %CI 1.67-8.32; P = 0.001) were independent factors associated with SDR.

CONCLUSIONS

 LCI and NBI are comparable for SSL detection, as well as for the detection of polyps and adenomas.

Colorectal Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Using Linked Color Imaging: A Multicenter, Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Linked color imaging (LCI) is a novel technology that improves the color differences between colorectal lesions and the surrounding mucosa. The present study aims to compare the detection of colorectal sessile serrated lesions (SSL) using LCI with white light imaging (WLI).

METHOD

A large-scale, multicenter, parallel prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in 4 hospitals in China. The participants were randomly assigned to the LCI group and WLI group. The primary endpoint was the SSL detection rate (SDR).

RESULTS

A total of 884 patients were involved in the intention-to-treat analysis, with 441 patients in the LCI group and 443 patients in the WLI group. The total polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and SDR were 51.8%, 35.7%, and 8.6%, respectively. The SDR was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (11.3% vs 5.9%, P = .004). Furthermore, LCI significantly increased the number of polyps and adenomas detected per patient, when compared with WLI (P < .05). In addition, there was higher detection rate of diminutive and flat lesions in the LCI group (P < .05). Multivariate analysis revealed that LCI is an independent factor associated with SDR (hazard ratio, 1.990; 95% confidence interval, 1.203-3.293; P = .007), along with withdrawal time (hazard ratio, 1.157; 95% confidence interval, 1.060-1.263; P = .001) and operator experience (hazard ratio, 1.850; 95% confidence interval, 1.045-3.273; P = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

LCI is significantly superior to WLI for SSL detection, and may improve polyp and adenoma detection. LCI can be recommended as an appropriate method for routine inspection during colonoscopy (http://www.chictr.org.cn number, ChiCTR2000035705).

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.

Analysis of Texture and Color Enhancement Imaging for Improving the Visibility of Non-polypoid Colorectal Lesions

INTRODUCTION

An endoscopic system using 5-color light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (EVIS X1; Olympus Co., Tokyo, Japan), which includes texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI), has been released. In this study, we analyzed the effects of TXI on the visibility of non-polypoid colorectal lesions and its diagnostic accuracy.

METHODS

We reviewed 101 non-polypoid lesions from 26 patients observed with white light imaging (WLI), narrow band imaging (NBI), and TXI. One representative image of each mode was evaluated by 6 endoscopists using a polyp visibility score of 4 (excellent) to 1 (poor). We calculated the color difference (CD) values for each lesion in the three modes. For tumor characteristics, one representative image of TXI and NBI magnification was evaluated by 3 experts according to a NBI classification.

RESULTS

The least squares means [95% confidence interval] of polyp visibility score of TXI (3.42 [3.06-3.77]) was significantly higher than that of WLI (2.85 [2.49-3.20], p < 0.001) but not that of NBI (3.33 [2.98-3.69], p = 0.258). The CD value of TXI (13.3 ± 6.3) was higher than that of WLI (9.7 ± 6.0, p < 0.001) but not that of NBI (13.1 ± 6.8, p = 0.81). For sessile serrated lesions, the CD value of TXI (11.1 ± 4.4) tended to be lower than that of NBI (12.6 ± 6.0, p = 0.07). The diagnostic accuracy and confidence level of magnification for NBI were significantly better than those for TXI (87.1 vs. 80.5%, p = 0.027, 87.5 vs. 62.7%, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

TXI showed better visibility than WLI in terms of the endoscopist's score and CD value and may improve polyp detection.

Using texture and colour enhancement imaging to evaluate gastrointestinal diseases in clinical practice: a review

White light imaging (WLI) is the most common endoscopic technique used for screening of gastrointestinal diseases. However, despite the advent of a new processor that offers sufficient clear illumination and other advanced developments in endoscopic instrumentation, WLI alone is inadequate for detecting all gastrointestinal diseases with abnormalities in mucosal discoloration and morphological changes to the mucosal surface. The recent development of image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) has dramatically improved the detection of gastrointestinal diseases. Texture and colour enhancement imaging (TXI) is a new type of IEE that enhances brightness, surface irregularities, such as elevations or depressions, and subtle colour changes. TXI with two modes, namely modes 1 and 2, can selectively enhance brightness in dark areas of an endoscopic image and subtle tissue differences such as slight morphological or colour changes while simultaneously preventing over-enhancement. Several clinical studies have investigated the efficacy of TXI for detecting and visualizing gastrointestinal diseases, including oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), Barret's epithelium, gastric cancer, gastric mucosal atrophy and intestinal metaplasia. Although TXI is often more useful for detecting and visualizing gastrointestinal diseases than WLI, it remains unclear whether TXI outperforms other IEEs, such as narrow-band imaging (NBI), in similar functions, and whether the performance of TXI modes 1 and 2 are comparable. Therefore, large-scale prospective studies are needed to compare the efficacy of TXI to WLI and other IEEs for endoscopic evaluation of patients undergoing screening endoscopy. Here, we review the characteristics and efficacy of TXI for the detection and visualization of gastrointestinal diseases.Key MessagesTXI mode 1 can improve the visibility of gastrointestinal diseases and qualitative diagnosis, especially for diseases associated with colour changes.The enhancement of texture and brightness with TXI mode 2 enables the detection of diseases, and is ideal for use in the first screening of gastrointestinal tract.

Linked color imaging improves visibility of colorectal serrated lesion by high color contrast to surrounding mucosa

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to objectively evaluate the efficacy of linked color imaging (LCI) in diagnosing colorectal serrated lesions by utilizing visibility scores and color differences.

METHODS

We examined 89 serrated lesions, including 36 hyperplastic polyps (HPs), 47 sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), and six traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs). Visibility changes were scored by six endoscopists as follows: 4, excellent; 3, good; 2, fair; and 1, poor. Furthermore, images obtained by white-light imaging (WLI) or LCI were assessed using the CIELAB color space in the lesion and adjacent mucosa. We calculated the mean color values (L*, a*, and b*) measured at five regions of interest of the sample lesion and surrounding mucosa and derived the color difference (ΔE*).

RESULTS

The visibility scores of both HPs and SSLs in LCI were significantly higher than that in WLI (HPs, 3.67/2.89, P < 0.001; SSLs, 3.07/2.36, P < 0.001). Furthermore, SSLs showed a significantly higher L* value and significantly lower a* and b* values in LCI than the adjacent mucosae (L*, 61.76/58.23, P = 0.016; a*, 14.91/17.58, P = 0.019; b*, 20.42/24.21, P = 0.007), while WLI produced no significant difference in any color value. A similar trend was apparent in HPs. In all serrated groups, LCI revealed significantly greater ΔE* values between the lesion and adjacent mucosa than WLI (HPs, 11.54/6.12; SSLs, 13.43/7.67; TSAs, 35.00/22.48).

CONCLUSION

Linked color imaging showed higher color contrast between serrated lesions and the surrounding mucosae compared with WLI, indicating improved visibility of colorectal serrated lesion using LCI.

Impact of Expanding Screening Colonoscopy Interval on Providers Choice of Prescribing Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening

GOALS

We investigated if increasing the colonoscopy screening interval from 10 to 15 years would increase provider preferences for colonoscopy as a screening test. We further examined whether having colonoscopy performed at a 15-year interval by an endoscopist with a high adenoma detection rate would influence preferences.

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is recommended every 10 years in average risk individuals without polyps for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The use of a 15-year interval offers substantial protection, increases cost-effectiveness, and might make colonoscopy more attractive to patients and health care providers who order CRC screening tests.

STUDY

An anonymous online survey of health care providers across a health care system that serves a single US state and encompasses both academic and community physicians was conducted. Physicians and nurse practitioners in family medicine, obstetrics-gynecology, and internal medicine were included. Providers were asked to indicate their preference for CRC screening tests as a proportion of tests they prescribe among 5 common screening tools. Responses were compared for current colonoscopy screening intervals and if the screening intervals are increased to 15 years.

RESULTS

One hundred and twelve (34%) responded of 326 providers. Colonoscopy was the most frequently ordered test for CRC screening. Increasing screening interval from 10 to 15 years increased the choice of colonoscopy from 75.2% to 78.6% ( P =0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding colonoscopy screening interval to 15 years could produce an increase in physicians and nurse practitioners choice of using colonoscopy for CRC screening, but the clinical impact appears minor. Additional surveys of patients and providers are needed.

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.

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.

Visibility evaluation of colorectal lesion using texture and color enhancement imaging with video

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Effect of Linked-color Imaging on the Detection of Adenomas in Screening Colonoscopies

OBJECTIVES

Linked-color imaging (LCI) is a new image-enhancement option that emphasizes mucosal surface contrast, facilitating the differentiation between colorectal lesions and normal mucosa. This study aimed to evaluate the potential of LCI to increase the detection of colorectal adenomas in screening colonoscopies.

METHODS

A prospective randomized study was conducted using white-light imaging (WLI), blue-laser imaging (BLI)-bright and LCI. The outcome measures were adenoma detection rate (ADR), mean number of adenomas per patient, and withdrawal time. Lesion characteristics such as size, morphology, location, and histology were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients were randomized, and 251 adenomas were detected. The overall ADR was 62%. The ADR was 52.9% for WLI, 62.1% for BLI-bright, and 71% for LCI, and was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (P=0.04). No significant difference was observed between LCI and BLI-bright (P=0.28) or BLI-bright and WLI (P=0.30). The mean number of adenomas per patient was 1.01, 1.03, and 1.62 for WLI, BLI-bright, and LCI, respectively, with a significant difference (P=0.02). Withdrawal time did not differ among the groups. A total of 71 adenomas were detected by WLI, 68 by BLI-bright, and 112 by LCI. There was no difference in the size and morphology of the adenomas detected, nor in the diagnosis of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps.

CONCLUSION

LCI significantly increased the detection of adenomas in screening colonoscopies.

Linked Colour imaging for the detection of polyps in patients with Lynch syndrome: a multicentre, parallel randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Despite regular colonoscopy surveillance, colorectal cancers still occur in patients with Lynch syndrome. Thus, detection of all relevant precancerous lesions remains very important. The present study investigates Linked Colour imaging (LCI), an image-enhancing technique, as compared with high-definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) for the detection of polyps in this patient group.

DESIGN

This prospective, randomised controlled trial was performed by 22 experienced endoscopists from eight centres in six countries. Consecutive Lynch syndrome patients ≥18 years undergoing surveillance colonoscopy were randomised (1:1) and stratified by centre for inspection with either LCI or HD-WLE. Primary outcome was the polyp detection rate (PDR).

RESULTS

Between January 2018 and March 2020, 357 patients were randomised and 332 patients analysed (160 LCI, 172 HD-WLE; 6 excluded due to incomplete colonoscopies and 19 due to insufficient bowel cleanliness). No significant difference was observed in PDR with LCI (44.4%; 95% CI 36.5% to 52.4%) compared with HD-WLE (36.0%; 95% CI 28.9% to 43.7%) (p=0.12). Of the secondary outcome parameters, more adenomas were found on a patient (adenoma detection rate 36.3%; vs 25.6%; p=0.04) and a colonoscopy basis (mean adenomas per colonoscopy 0.65 vs 0.42; p=0.04). The median withdrawal time was not statistically different between LCI and HD-WLE (12 vs 11 min; p=0.16).

CONCLUSION

LCI did not improve the PDR compared with HD-WLE in patients with Lynch syndrome undergoing surveillance. The relevance of findings more adenomas by LCI has to be examined further.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03344289.

Measuring and Improving Quality of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is largely preventable, yet it remains a major public health issue as it is the third most common and deadly malignancy in the United States. While there are many ways to screen for CRC, colonoscopy remains the gold standard as it is the only test that is both cancer-detecting and cancer-preventing through removal of precancerous polyps. Through identifying and removing neoplastic lesions, colonoscopy reduces CRC incidence by 31%-91% and CRC mortality by 65%-88%. However, colonoscopy is not an infallible test-there is a chance for missed lesions during the exam and there is substantial variation in outcomes among endoscopists. To enhance the quality of colonoscopic exams, and ultimately to improve CRC outcomes, quality indicators have been developed for measuring endoscopists' performance. In this review, we describe the colonoscopic quality indicators and benchmarks recommended by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/American College of Gastroenterology Task Force on Quality in Endoscopy for screening colonoscopies in average-risk individuals. Measuring and monitoring endoscopists' performance on these measures are critical first steps in striving toward conducting high quality exams. We also review the evidence for interventions that aim to improve critical measures including adenoma detection rate, withdrawal time, cecal intubation, and bowel preparation quality. Finally, we provide a preview of the forthcoming Advancing Care for Appropriate Colon Health Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Value Pathway by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and its potential impact on clinical practice.

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.

Progress in understanding of factors related to colonoscopic adenoma detection rate

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the proportion of average-risk patients undergoing screening colonoscopy in whom an adenoma is found, and it is an important quality indicator of colonoscopy. ADR is closely related to the risk of interval colorectal cancer. A deeply study of ADR is essential for endoscopists. In this paper, we review the progress in the understanding of factors related to ADR before, during, and after colonoscopy, as well as several issues worthy of attention.

Linked color imaging, mucosal exposure device, their combination, and standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

By different mechanisms, image-enhancement techniques (linked color imaging [LCI]) and mucosal exposure devices (Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy [EAC]) can improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR) during screening colonoscopy. The impact of the combination of the 2 techniques has never been studied. This study aimed to compare the ADR between the combination of LCI and EAC (LCI+EAC), LCI alone, EAC alone, and standard high-definition (HD) colonoscopy.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial included participants who underwent screening colonoscopy. Participants were randomized to LCI+EAC, LCI, EAC, and standard HD colonoscopy. All colonoscopies were performed by endoscopists with a recorded ADR ≥35%. The primary outcome was the ADR. Secondary outcomes were proximal ADR (pADR) and the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APC).

RESULTS

One thousand participants were included in the study. The LCI+EAC group provided the highest ADR and pADR. The ADRs in the LCI+EAC, LCI, EAC, and standard HD colonoscopy groups were 57.2%, 52.8%, 51.6%, and 47.6%, respectively, with pADRs of 38.4%, 34.8%, 33.6%, and 28.0%, respectively. The mean numbers of APC were 1.28, 1.20, 1.16, and .89, respectively. After a multiple comparison adjustment, a significant difference in pADR was only observed between the LCI+EAC and standard HD colonoscopy groups (difference, 10.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, .02%-17.4%; P = .05). The incidence rate ratios of the adenoma numbers were significantly higher in the LCI+EAC (1.43), LCI (1.34), and EAC (1.30) groups relative to the standard HD colonoscopy group (.89) (P < .009 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of LCI and EAC can significantly improve the detection of pADR and APC but not ADR by high-ADR performers. (Clinical trial registration number: TCTR20190319001.).

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.

Application of linked color imaging in the diagnosis of early gastrointestinal neoplasms and precancerous lesions: a review

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive endoscopic resection is often effective in the management of early gastrointestinal tumors. However, advanced and more effective methods of endoscopic examination are required to improve the rate of diagnosing early gastrointestinal tumors.

DISCUSSION

The development of dye-based image-enhanced endoscopy (d-IEE) and equipment-based image-enhanced endoscopy (e-IEE) has helped improve the diagnostic rate of early gastrointestinal tumor using endoscopy. In some special cases, these methods are still not accurate in diagnosing lesions. On the basis of these e-IEEs, a new endoscopic technique, linked color imaging (LCI), that combines a specific short wavelength narrow band of light with white light, has been developed.

CONCLUSION

In this article, we summarized the characteristics of LCI and the development of research regarding digestive tract examination.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Application of linked color imaging in early gastrointestinal neoplasms At present, the complete diagnosis of early gastrointestinal tumors and precancerous lesions can be made by gastrointestinal endoscopy. With the improvement of therapeutic instruments and operators' experience, endoscopic therapy can often achieve significant effect in the treatment of early gastrointestinal tumors. The development and spread of equipment-based image-enhanced endoscopy (e-IEE) mode has helped improve the diagnosis rate of early gastrointestinal tumors under endoscopy. However, in some special cases, these methods are still not accurate for the diagnosis of lesions. On the basis of these E-IEEs, a new endoscopic technique, linked color imaging (LCI), has been developed, which combines a specific short wavelength narrow band of light with white light. LCI can significantly improve the diagnostic rate of all types of gastrointestinal mucosal lesions. Tumor lesions and inflammatory lesions can be distinguished by observing the mucosal microvascular structure and color difference. LCI helps detect early gastrointestinal mucosal lesions by taking advantage of the differences in light absorption of different wavelengths and contrast of enhanced colors in the later stage.

Linked colour imaging versus white-light colonoscopy for the detection of flat colorectal lesions: A randomized controlled trial

AIM

Linked colour imaging is an image-enhanced endoscopy system that emphasizes the red portion of the mucosa's colour. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of linked colour imaging with white-light colonoscopy for the detection of flat-type colorectal polyps.

METHOD

This was a single-centre, randomized controlled trial. Enrolled patients were those aged ≥50 years undergoing cap-assisted colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. They were randomized in a 1:1 ratio for observation using linked colour imaging or white-light colonoscopy. All colorectal polyps detected were removed or biopsied. The primary outcome was the number of flat-type polyps per patient in patients in whom flat polyps were detected. Secondary outcomes included adenoma and polyp detection rates.

RESULTS

There were 302 subjects randomized: 152 to linked colour imaging and 150 to white-light colonoscopy. There were no differences in the clinical features between the two arms. The number of flat polyps detected per patient using linked colour imaging was approximately twice that with white light (2.9 ± 3.0 vs 1.2 ± 1.6, p = 0.045). Linked colour imaging also proved superior to white-light colonoscopy in terms of adenoma and polyp detection rates [adenomas 66% (101/152) vs 49% (73/150), p = 0.0024; polyps 69% (105/152) vs 55% (82/150), p = 0.013]. The ratio of polyps detected in the right colon compared with those detected in the left colon was significantly greater using linked colour than white-light imaging (168/64 vs 93/84; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with white-light colonoscopy, linked colour imaging improved adenoma and polyp detection rates, including detection of flat-type colorectal polyps.