The efficacy of polyp detection and tumor characterization of blue laser imaging, blue light imaging, and linked color imaging with light-emitted diode (LED) and LASER endoscope

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.

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of NBI, Laser-BLI and LED-BLI: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

New image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE), blue Light Imaging (LED-BLI) is launched in USA and Europe, whereas Blue Laser Imaging (Laser-BLI) is available only Asian and some countries. No studies have directly compared the diagnostic accuracy of narrow band imaging (NBI), Laser-BLI and LED-BLI for colorectal tumors. The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the three methods for colorectal tumor using the NBI international colorectal endoscopic (NICE) classification and the Japanese NBI Expert Team (JNET) classifications.

METHODS

This was a multi-center evaluator-blinded, randomized control trial of patients who underwent endoscopic colorectal tumor resection. The patients were randomly assigned to NBI, Laser-BLI or LED-BLI. Cropped images were sent to blinded external evaluators and diagnosed according to NICE and JNET classifications. The diagnostic accuracy of each endoscopy system was compared with non-inferiority test.

RESULTS

A total of 619 colonic tumors were resected from 230 patients and evaluated by external four evaluators. The diagnostic accuracy of NBI for NICE 1, NICE 2, NICE 3 was 90.6%, 90.3% and 99.5%, respectively and for JNET 1, JNET 2A, JNET 2B and JNET 3, it was 94.6%, 72.0%, 79.2% and 99.1%, respectively. In non-inferiority test, Laser-BLI and LED-BLI revealed non-inferiority to NBI in all NICE and JNET categories (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laser-BLI and LED-BLI had high diagnostic accuracy and non-inferiority of NBI, especially for hyperplastic polyp/sessile serrated lesion and low-grade dysplasia. This is first trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy with NBI, Laser-BLI and LED-BLI and useful to understand the position of each IEE. This trial was registered as UMIN000032107.

Two cases of colonic tumors observed by linked color imaging and texture and color enhancement imaging with the tablet-image comparison method

An endoscope system using 5‐color light‐emitting diodes (LEDs) (EVIS X1: CV‐1500, Olympus Co., Tokyo, Japan) was released worldwide in July 2020. In addition to the improvement of narrow band imaging (NBI), this system enables texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI). TXI makes the lesion reddish and supports better visibility of colorectal lesions in comparison to white light imaging for improving lesion detection. On the other hand, another 4‐color LED endoscope system (ELUXEO: BL‐7000; Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) has been on the market in the West since 2017. This system enables blue light imaging (BLI) and linked color imaging (LCI). Generally, the accurate comparison between two images obtained by two different endoscope systems is difficult. To resolve this problem, we developed a method named the tablet‐image comparison (TIC) method. TIC is a simple, easy, and paperless method to get images under similar conditions of two endoscope systems for an accurate comparison. We herein report two colorectal lesions in which accurate comparisons of images between TXI and LCI and between improved NBI and BLI obtained in the EVIS X1 and ELUXEO systems were performed using the TIC method. One was IIa 30 mm (high‐grade dysplasia) and the other was IIa 25 mm (low‐grade adenoma). A detailed comparison between TXI and LCI could be performed by TIC. In these two cases, with a distant view, TXI showed greater redness than LCI. LCI showed slightly higher brightness than TXI. In magnified TXI and LCI, the irregularities observed were similar to NBI and BLI, respectively.