Can we ease the financial burden of colonoscopy? Using real-time endoscopic assessment of polyp histology to predict surveillance intervals

What size cutoff level should be used to implement optical polyp diagnosis?

BACKGROUND : The risk of advanced pathology increases with polyp size, as does the potential for mismanagement when optical diagnosis is used. This study aimed to evaluate the proportion of patients who would be assigned inadequate surveillance intervals when different size cutoffs are adopted for use of optical diagnosis. METHODS : In a post hoc analysis of three prospective studies, the use of optical diagnosis was evaluated for three polyp size groups: 1-3, 1-5, and 1-10 mm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in whom advanced adenomas were found and optical diagnosis resulted in delayed surveillance. Secondary outcomes included agreements between surveillance intervals based on high confidence optical diagnosis and pathology outcomes, reduction in histopathological examinations, and proportion of patients who could receive an immediate surveillance recommendation. RESULTS : We included 3374 patients (7291 polyps ≤ 10 mm) undergoing complete colonoscopies (median age 66.0 years, 75.2 % male, 29.6 % for screening). The percentage of patients with advanced adenomas and either 2- or 7-year delayed surveillance intervals (n = 79) was 3.8 %, 15.2 %, and 25.3 % for size cutoffs of 1-3, 1-5, and 1-10 mm polyps, respectively (P < 0.001). Surveillance interval agreements between pathology and optical diagnosis for the three groups were 97.2 %, 95.5 %, and 94.2 %, respectively. Total reductions in pathology examinations for the three groups were 33.5 %, 62.3 %, and 78.2 %, respectively. CONCLUSION : A 3-mm cutoff for clinical implementation of optical diagnosis resulted in a very low risk of delayed management of advanced neoplasia while showing high surveillance interval agreement with pathology and a one-third reduction in overall requirement for pathology examinations.

The location-based resect and discard strategy for diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Clinical implementation of the resect-and-discard strategy has been difficult because optical diagnosis is highly operator dependent. This prospective study aimed to evaluate a resect-and-discard strategy that is not operator dependent.

METHODS

The study evaluated a resect-and-discard strategy that uses the anatomical polyp location to classify colonic polyps into non-neoplastic or low risk neoplastic. All rectosigmoid diminutive polyps were considered hyperplastic and all polyps located proximally to the sigmoid colon were considered neoplastic. Surveillance interval assignments based on these a priori assumptions were compared with those based on actual pathology results and on optical diagnosis. The primary outcome was ≥ 90 % agreement with pathology in surveillance interval assignment.

RESULTS

1117 patients undergoing complete colonoscopy were included and 482 (43.1 %) had at least one diminutive polyp. Surveillance interval agreement between the location-based strategy and pathological findings using the 2020 US Multi-Society Task Force guideline was 97.0 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.96-0.98), surpassing the ≥ 90 % benchmark. Optical diagnoses using the NICE and Sano classifications reached 89.1 % and 90.01 % agreement, respectively (P < 0.001), and were inferior to the location-based strategy. The location-based resect-and-discard strategy allowed a 69.7 % (95 %CI 0.67-0.72) reduction in pathology examinations compared with 55.3 % (95 %CI 0.52-0.58; NICE and Sano) and 41.9 % (95 %CI 0.39-0.45; WASP) with optical diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The location-based resect-and-discard strategy achieved very high surveillance interval agreement with pathology-based surveillance interval assignment, surpassing the ≥ 90 % benchmark and outperforming optical diagnosis in surveillance interval agreement and the number of pathology examinations avoided.

Guidance for setting easy-to-adopt competence criteria for optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps: a simulation approach

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

One reason the optical diagnosis strategy for diminutive colorectal polyps has not yet been implemented is that the current competence criteria (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovation [PIVI] initiative) are difficult to use in daily practice. To provide guidance for setting alternative easy-to-adopt competence criteria, we determined the lowest proportion of diminutive polyps that should have a correct optical diagnosis to meet the PIVI.

METHODS

For this simulation study, we used datasets from 2 prospectively collected cohorts of patients who underwent colonoscopy in either a primary colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening setting. In the simulation approach, virtual endoscopists or computer-aided diagnosis systems performed optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps with a fixed diagnostic performance level (strategy) on all individuals in the cohort who had ≥1 diminutive polyp. Strategies were defined by systematically varying the proportion of correct optical diagnoses for each polyp subtype (ie, adenomas, hyperplastic polyps, sessile serrated lesions). For each strategy, we determined whether PIVI-1 (≥90% agreement with U.S. or European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [ESGE] surveillance guidelines) and PIVI-2 (≥90% negative predictive value [NPV] for neoplastic lesions in the rectosigmoid) were met using Monte Carlo sampling with 1000 repetitions, with histology as reference.

RESULTS

The level of overall diagnostic accuracy to achieve the PIVI differed significantly depending on the clinical setting and guidelines used. In the colonoscopy screening setting, all diagnostic strategies in which 92% of all diminutive polyps (regardless of histology) were diagnosed correctly led to 90% or more agreement with U.S. surveillance intervals (ie, PIVI-1). For all diagnostic strategies in which ≥89% of all diminutive polyps were correctly diagnosed, at least 90% NPV was achieved (ie, PIVI-2). For the FIT screening setting, values were respectively ≥77% and ≥94%. When using ESGE guidelines, PIVI-1 was in both settings already met when 40% of all diminutive polyps were diagnosed correctly.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the fixed PIVI criteria, our simulation study shows that different thresholds for the proportion of correctly diagnosed diminutive polyps lead to different clinical consequences depending on guidelines and clinical setting. However, this target proportion of diminutive colorectal polyps correctly diagnosed with optical diagnosis represents easier-to-adopt competence criteria.

Optical Technologies for Endoscopic Real-Time Histologic Assessment of Colorectal Polyps: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Accurate, real-time, endoscopic risk stratification of colorectal polyps would improve decision-making and optimize clinical efficiency. Technologies to manipulate endoscopic optical outputs can be used to predict polyp histology in vivo; however, it remains unclear how accuracy has progressed and whether it is sufficient for routine clinical implementation.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies were included if they prospectively deployed an endoscopic optical technology for real-time in vivo prediction of adenomatous colorectal polyps. Polyposis and inflammatory bowel diseases were excluded. Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis was performed, presenting 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

One hundred two studies using optical technologies on 33,123 colorectal polyps were included. Digital chromoendoscopy differentiated neoplasia (adenoma and adenocarcinoma) from benign polyps with sensitivity of 92.2% (90.6%-93.9% CI) and specificity of 84.0% (81.5%-86.3% CI), with no difference between constituent technologies (narrow-band imaging, Fuji intelligent Chromo Endoscopy, iSCAN) or with only diminutive polyps. Dye chromoendoscopy had sensitivity of 92.7% (90.1%-94.9% CI) and specificity of 86.6% (82.9%-89.9% CI), similarly unchanged for diminutive polyps. Spectral analysis of autofluorescence had sensitivity of 94.4% (84.0%-99.1% CI) and specificity of 50.9% (13.2%-88.8% CI). Endomicroscopy had sensitivity of 93.6% (85.3%-98.3% CI) and specificity of 92.5% (81.8%-98.1% CI). Computer-aided diagnosis had sensitivity of 88.9% (74.2%-96.7% CI) and specificity of 80.4% (52.6%-95.7% CI). Prediction confidence and endoscopist experience alone did not significantly improve any technology. The only subgroup to demonstrate a negative predictive value for adenoma above 90% was digital chromoendoscopy, making high confidence predictions of diminutive recto-sigmoid polyps. Chronologic meta-analyses show a falling negative predictive value over time. A significant publication bias exists.

DISCUSSION

This novel approach to meta-analysis demonstrates that existing optical technologies are increasingly unlikely to allow safe "resect and discard" strategies and that step-change innovation may be required. A "diagnose and leave" strategy may be supported for diminutive recto-sigmoid polyps diagnosed with high confidence; however, limitations exist in the evidence base for this cohort.

Optical Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps: Recent Developments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps has been recently proposed as an alternative to histopathologic diagnosis. Recent developments in imaging techniques, new classification systems, and the use of artificial intelligence have allowed for increased viability of optical diagnosis. This review provides an up-to-date overview of optical diagnosis recommendations, classifications, outcomes, and recent developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are currently seven major classification systems and three major society recommendations for quality benchmarks for optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps. The NICE classification has been extensively studied and meets quality benchmarks for most imaging techniques but does not allow for the diagnosis of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs). The SIMPLE classification has met quality benchmarks for NBI and i-Scan and allows for the diagnosis of SSPs. Other classification systems need to be further studied to validate effectiveness. Computer-assisted diagnosis of colorectal polyps is a very promising recent development with first studies showing that society-recommended quality benchmarks for real-time colonoscopies on patients are being met. Limitations include a non-negligible percentage of failure to diagnose, low specificity, and low number of real-time diagnostic studies. More research needs to be performed to further understand the value of artificial intelligence for optical polyp diagnosis. Optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps is currently a viable strategy for experienced endoscopists using validated classifications and imaging-enhanced endoscopy. Artificial intelligence-based diagnosis could make optical diagnosis widely applicable but is currently in its early developmental stage.

Virtual chromoendoscopy for the real-time assessment of colorectal polyps in vivo: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Current clinical practice is to remove a colorectal polyp detected during colonoscopy and determine whether it is an adenoma or hyperplastic by histopathology. Identifying adenomas is important because they may eventually become cancerous if untreated, whereas hyperplastic polyps do not usually develop into cancer, and a surveillance interval is set based on the number and size of adenomas found. Virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) (an electronic endoscopic imaging technique) could be used by the endoscopist under strictly controlled conditions for real-time optical diagnosis of diminutive (≤ 5 mm) colorectal polyps to replace histopathological diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the VCE technologies narrow-band imaging (NBI), flexible spectral imaging colour enhancement (FICE) and i-scan for the characterisation and management of diminutive (≤ 5 mm) colorectal polyps using high-definition (HD) systems without magnification.

DESIGN

Systematic review and economic analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

People undergoing colonoscopy for screening or surveillance or to investigate symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer.

INTERVENTIONS

NBI, FICE and i-scan.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Diagnostic accuracy, recommended surveillance intervals, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adverse effects, incidence of colorectal cancer, mortality and cost-effectiveness of VCE compared with histopathology.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for published English-language studies from inception to June 2016. Bibliographies of related papers, systematic reviews and company information were screened and experts were contacted to identify additional evidence.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic reviews of test accuracy and economic evaluations were undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Meta-analyses were conducted, where possible, to inform the independent economic model. A cost-utility decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of VCE compared with histopathology. The model used a decision tree for patients undergoing endoscopy, combined with estimates of long-term outcomes (e.g. incidence of colorectal cancer and subsequent morbidity and mortality) derived from University of Sheffield School of Health and Related Research's bowel cancer screening model. The model took a NHS perspective, with costs and benefits discounted at 3.5% over a lifetime horizon. There were limitations in the data on the distribution of adenomas across risk categories and recurrence rates post polypectomy.

RESULTS

Thirty test accuracy studies were included: 24 for NBI, five for i-scan and three for FICE (two studies assessed two interventions). Polyp assessments made with high confidence were associated with higher sensitivity and endoscopists experienced in VCE achieved better results than those without experience. Two economic evaluations were included. NBI, i-scan and FICE are cost-saving strategies compared with histopathology and the number of quality-adjusted life-years gained was similar for histopathology and VCE. The correct surveillance interval would be given to 95% of patients with NBI, 94% of patients with FICE and 97% of patients with i-scan.

LIMITATIONS

Limited evidence was available for i-scan and FICE and there was heterogeneity among the NBI studies. There is a lack of data on longer-term health outcomes of patients undergoing VCE for assessment of diminutive colorectal polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

VCE technologies, using HD systems without magnification, could potentially be used for the real-time assessment of diminutive colorectal polyps, if endoscopists have adequate experience and training.

FUTURE WORK

Future research priorities include head-to-head randomised controlled trials of all three VCE technologies; more research on the diagnostic accuracy of FICE and i-scan (when used without magnification); further studies evaluating the impact of endoscopist experience and training on outcomes; studies measuring adverse effects, HRQoL and anxiety; and longitudinal data on colorectal cancer incidence, HRQoL and mortality.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016037767.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Optical diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia: A Western perspective

Optical diagnosis is an emerging paradigm in Western endoscopic practice for the colonoscopic management of diminutive polyps, and includes two complementary clinical strategies: 'resect and discard', in which diminutive high-confidence adenomas are identified, and then removed and discarded without pathological assessment; and 'diagnose and leave', where diminutive high-confidence hyperplastic polyps are identified in the rectosigmoid and then left without resection or biopsy. Like other aspects of colonoscopy performance, adoption of optical diagnosis in Western practice is limited by operator dependency and variation in clinical effectiveness. There is substantial potential for optical diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia during colonoscopy to alleviate the rising costs of health care in the West. However, operator dependence in diagnostic performance together with critical system factors such as informed consent, credentialing, medical legal support and reimbursement incentives must be overcome before optical diagnosis of diminutive lesions is considered for widespread adoption in Western clinical practice.