Comparative effectiveness of i-SCAN™ and high-definition white light characterizing small colonic polyps

Comparative Study of Narrow-Band Imaging and i-scan for Predicting the Histology of Intermediate-to-Large Colorectal Polyps: A Prospective, Randomized Pilot Study

Background/Aims

To date, no reports have compared the diagnostic efficacy of narrow-band imaging (NBI) and i-scan for the histologic prediction of intermediate-to-large colorectal polyps. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of NBI and i-scan in predicting histology, and their inter-/intra-observer agreement.

Methods

We performed a prospective, randomized study that included 66 patients (NBI, n=33 vs. i-scan, n=33) with colorectal polyps (size >10 mm but <50 mm) who underwent colonoscopic resection. During the procedure, three endoscopists documented their prediction using the Japan NBI Expert Team (JNET) classification. Two months after study completion, the endoscopists reviewed still images and video clips for analysis.

Results

The overall diagnostic accuracies in the NBI and i-scan groups were 73.7% (73/99) and 75.8% (75/99), respectively, and there was no statistical significance between the two groups (p=0.744). The JNET classification as applied to NBI and i-scan showed substantial inter-observer agreement (NBI κ-value 0.612, p=0.001 vs. i-scan κ-value 0.662, p=0.002). Additionally, the κ-values of intra-observer agreement were in the range of 0.385–0.660 with NBI and 0.364–0.741 with i-scan.

Conclusions

NBI and i-scan have similar diagnostic accuracies for the histologic prediction of intermediate-to-large colorectal polyps. Furthermore, the inter-/intra-observer agreement was acceptable for both modalities when the JNET classification was applied.

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.

Diagnostic accuracy of i-scan image enhancement for real-time endoscopic diagnosis of small colorectal polyps: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

i-Scan is a digital image enhancement technology, reported to improve diagnostic performance during endoscopy. Previous studies have investigated the accuracy of i-scan for distinguishing between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colonic polyps and suggested diagnostic accuracy close to that required for use in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the available literature investigating diagnostic accuracy for i-scan optical diagnosis when made in real time for colorectal polyps <10 mm in size.

DATA SOURCES

The databases of Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies.

METHODS

A bivariate random effects model was used to produce pooled sensitivity and specificity values, and univariable meta-regression was applied for subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 15 studies, and diagnosis of 2817 polyps. The area under the hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.96. The pooled sensitivity of i-scan optical diagnosis was 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.85-0.95). The specificity was 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.83-0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis updates and summarizes the available evidence concerning the diagnostic performance of i-scan for small colorectal polyps. An acceptable degree of accuracy was found, showing potential to support a 'resect and discard' strategy for colonic polyps. There was not found to be a significant difference in diagnostic performance between different clinical settings (i.e. teaching hospitals or general hospitals).

Detection and characterization of colorectal polyps using high-definition white light and i-Scan: Evidence-based consensus recommendations using a modified Delphi process

Background

i-Scan is an image enhancement modality, which provides enhanced views of mucosal structures and vascular patterns.

Methods

A modified Delphi process was used to develop a series of evidence-based statements on the role of high-definition white light (HDWL) and i-Scan for the detection and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms. Each statement was voted to achieve consensus (i.e. >80% agreement).

Results

Seven proposed statements achieved consensus: (1) HDWL is recommended rather than standard definition (SD) for detection and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms; (2) HDWL colonoscopy with i-Scan improves polyp and adenoma detection rates when compared with SD colonoscopy; (3) HDWL + i-Scan is superior to HDWL alone for the optical diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms; (4) HDWL + i-Scan in expert hands meets American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) in the Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) standards for optical diagnosis of diminutive neoplasms; (5) HDWL + i-Scan in non-expert hands does not meet ASGE PIVI standards for optical diagnosis of diminutive neoplasms; (6) optical diagnosis of polyps with i-Scan has a learning curve and needs systematic training; and (7) the performance of i-Scan for the in vivo diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms is similar to Narrow Band Imaging (NBI) and Fuji Intelligent Chromo Endoscopy (FICE).

Conclusions

Seven proposed statements on the use of HDWL and i-Scan for the detection and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms achieved consensus.

Can technology increase adenoma detection rate?

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in Europe and North America. Colonoscopy is the gold standard investigation for the colon but is not perfect, and small or flat adenomas can be missed which increases the risk of patients subsequently developing colorectal cancer. Adenoma detection rate is the most widely used marker of quality, and low rates are associated with increased rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Standards of colonoscopy and adenoma detection vary widely between different endoscopists. Interventions to improve adenoma detection rate are therefore required. Many devices have been purported to increase adenoma detection rate. This review looks at current available evidence for device technology to improve adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy.

High Definition Colonoscopy Combined with i-SCAN Imaging Technology Is Superior in the Detection of Adenomas and Advanced Lesions Compared to High Definition Colonoscopy Alone

Background. Improved detection of adenomatous polyps using i-SCAN has mixed results in small studies. Utility of i-SCAN as a primary surveillance modality for colorectal cancer screening during colonoscopy is uncertain. Aim. Comparing high definition white light endoscopy (HDWLE) to i-SCAN in their ability to detect adenomas during colonoscopy. Methods. Prospective cohort study of 1936 average risk patients who had a screening colonoscopy at an ambulatory procedure center. Patients underwent colonoscopy with high definition white light endoscopy withdrawal versus i-SCAN withdrawal during endoscopic screening exam. Primary outcome measurement was adenoma detection rate for i-SCAN versus high definition white light endoscopy. Secondary measurements included polyp size, pathology, and morphology. Results. 1007 patients underwent colonoscopy with i-SCAN and 929 with HDWLE. 618 adenomas were detected in the i-SCAN group compared to 402 in the HDWLE group (p < 0.01). More advanced adenomas (≥10 mm) were found by i-SCAN, 79 versus 47 (p = 0.021) and based upon histology alone 37 versus 18 (p = 0.028). Conclusions. i-SCAN detected significantly more adenomas and advanced adenomas compared to high definition white light endoscopy.

Accuracy of i-Scan for Optical Diagnosis of Colonic Polyps: A Meta-Analysis

Background

i-Scan is a novel virtual chromoendoscopy system designed to enhance surface and vascular patterns to improve optical diagnostic performance. Numerous prospective studies have been done to evaluate the accuracy of i-Scan in differentiating colonic neoplasms from non-neoplasms. i-Scan could be an effective endoscopic technique for optical diagnosis of colonic polyps.

Objective

Our aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of published data to establish the diagnostic accuracy of i-Scan for optical diagnosis of colonic polyps.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Medline, Elsevier ScienceDirect and Cochrane Library databases. We used a bivariate meta-analysis following a random effects model to summarize the data and plotted hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic (HSROC) curves. The area under the HSROC curve (AUC) serves as an indicator of the diagnostic accuracy.

Results

The meta-analysis included a total of 925 patients and 2312 polyps. For the overall studies, the area under the HSROC curve was 0.96. The summary sensitivity was 90.4% (95%CI 85%-94.1%) and specificity was 90.9% (95%CI 84.3%-94.9%). In 11 studies predicting polyps histology in real-time, the summary sensitivity and specificity was 91.5% (95%CI 85.7%-95.1%) and 92.1% (95%CI 84.5%-96.1%), respectively, with the AUC of 0.97. For three different diagnostic criteria (Kudo, NICE, others), the sensitivity was 86.3%, 93.0%, 85.0%, respectively and specificity was 84.8%, 94.4%, 91.8%, respectively.

Conclusions

Endoscopic diagnosis with i-Scan has accurate optical diagnostic performance to differentiate neoplastic from non-neoplastic polyps with an area under the HSROC curve exceeding 0.90. Both the sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing colonic polyps are over 90%.

Tools for polyp histology prediction

Although removal of adenomatous polyps has been shown to decrease the risk of colon cancer, distal hyperplastic polyps are thought to not have malignant potential. Most polyps detected during colonoscopy are diminutive (≤ 5 mm) and rarely harbor advanced histology, such as high-grade dysplasia or cancer. Therefore, predicting histology in real-time during colonoscopy can potentially decrease the enormous expenditure that ensues from universal histopathologic evaluation of polyps, and several novel imaging technologies have been developed and tested over the past decade for this purpose. Of these different technologies, electronic chromoendoscopy seems to strike a fair balance between accuracy, feasibility, and cost.

ASGE Technology Committee systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the ASGE PIVI thresholds for adopting real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps

In vivo real-time assessment of the histology of diminutive (≤5 mm) colorectal polyps detected at colonoscopy can be achieved by means of an "optical biopsy" by using currently available endoscopic technologies. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee to specifically assess whether acceptable performance thresholds outlined by an ASGE Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) document for clinical adoption of these technologies have been met. We conducted direct meta-analyses calculating the pooled negative predictive value (NPV) for narrow-band imaging (NBI), i-SCAN, and Fujinon Intelligent Color Enhancement (FICE)-assisted optical biopsy for predicting adenomatous polyp histology of small/diminutive colorectal polyps. We also calculated the pooled percentage agreement with histopathology when assigning postpolypectomy surveillance intervals based on combining real-time optical biopsy of colorectal polyps 5 mm or smaller with histopathologic assessment of polyps larger than 5 mm. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated by means of I(2) statistics. Our meta-analyses indicate that optical biopsy with NBI, exceeds the NPV threshold for adenomatous polyp histology, supporting a "diagnose-and-leave" strategy for diminutive predicted nonneoplastic polyps in the rectosigmoid colon. The pooled NPV of NBI for adenomatous polyp histology by using the random-effects model was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88-94). This finding was associated with a high degree of heterogeneity (I(2) = 89%). Subgroup analysis indicated that the pooled NPV was greater than 90% for academic medical centers (91.8%; 95% CI, 89-94), for experts (93%; 95% CI, 91-96), and when the optical biopsy assessment was made with high confidence (93%; 95% CI, 90-96). Our meta-analyses also indicate that the agreement in assignment of postpolypectomy surveillance intervals based on optical biopsy with NBI of diminutive colorectal polyps is 90% or greater in academic settings (91%; 95% CI, 86-95), with experienced endoscopists (92%; 95% CI, 88-96) and when optical biopsy assessments are made with high confidence (91%; 95% CI, 88-95). Our systematic review and meta-analysis confirms that the thresholds established by the ASGE PIVI for real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive polyps have been met, at least with NBI optical biopsy, with endoscopists who are expert in using this advanced imaging technology and when assessments are made with high confidence.

Kudo’s pit pattern classification for colorectal neoplasms: A meta-analysis

AIM: To analyze the current available evidence of Kudo’s pit pattern classification for diagnosing colorectal neoplasms.

METHODS: A search was performed on Pubmed/Embase to identify studies reporting the outcomes of the pit pattern classification in colorectal polyps. Retrieved records were evaluated and selected by two independent investigators. The number of patients, polyps and diagnostic performance of Kudo’s pit pattern classification were retrieved from suitable studies. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were calculated using fixed or random effect models according to their heterogeneity. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plot, Egger’s test, and Begg’s test. Sensitivity analysis was performed by omitting one study at a time and selecting a subgroup consisting of 11 magnifying chromoendoscopy studies.

RESULTS: 20 eligible studies were included in which a total of 5111 colorectal lesions in 3418 patients were identified for the differentiation of neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps. Pit pattern classification in all the studies of mucosal patterns with magnification resulted in a pooled sensitivity of 89.0% (95%CI: 85.2-91.9) and pooled specificity of 85.7% (95%CI: 81.3-89.2) and the area under the SROC curve was 0.9354. There was significant publication bias (P = 0.038 and 0.006 for sensitivity and specificity using Egger’s test, P = 0.035 and 0.139 for sensitivity and specificity using Begg’s test, respectively). No single study significantly affected the pooled result, and the magnifying chromoendoscopy subgroup yielded a sensitivity of 92.7% (95%CI: 89.2-95.2) and specificity of 87.3% (95%CI: 81.6-91.4).

CONCLUSION: Kudo’s pit pattern classification is an accurate diagnostic method for the differentiation of neoplastic colorectal lesions. Publication bias is significant in the current available literature.

Colonic polyps: Is it useful to characterize them with advanced endoscopy?

There have been major developments in endoscopic imaging techniques in recent years. Endoscopes with high definition and magnification can provide high quality images that allow for the histological estimation of lesions in vivo and in situ when combined with ancillary enhancement techniques such as chromoendoscopy (CE) and virtual CE (narrow band imaging fujinon intelligent chromoendoscopy, or i-Scan). Despite the enormous potential for these advanced techniques, their value and feasibility in the clinic are still doubted, particularly in cases of colonic polyps that are slated for removal, where in vivo characterization may be deemed unnecessary. However, there are several advantages offered by such advanced endoscopic imaging. CE with or without magnification demonstrates highly accurate histology and invasion depth prediction, and virtual CE is a feasible and less cumbersome alternative to CE in terms of histological estimation, though not sufficiently accurate for depth invasion prediction. Furthermore, the supplementary information provided by advanced imaging systems can assist the endoscopist in the selection of a strategic approach, such as in deciding whether a colonic lesion should be resected, left in situ, or requires more intensive surgical treatment. Lastly, advanced high-resolution imaging techniques may be more cost effective, such that histopathology of low-risk lesions following resection can be eliminated. The results of these evaluations and comparisons with traditional CE are presented and discussed. Taken together, the benefits provided by these advanced capabilities justify their development, and advocates their use for the treatment and management of colonic polyps.

Advances in colonoscopy

Colonoscopy with polypectomy has been established as the major prevention and detection strategy for colorectal cancer for over a decade. Over this period advances in colonoscopic imaging, polyp detection, prediction of histopathology and polypectomy techniques have all been seen; however, the true magnitude of the limitations of colonoscopy has only recently been widely recognized. The rate and location of missed or interval cancers after complete colonoscopy appears to be influenced by the operator-dependency of colonoscopy and failure of conventional practices to detect and treat adenomatous, and possibly more importantly, non-adenomatous colorectal cancer precursors. Consequently, studies that expand our understanding of these factors and advances that aim to improve colonoscopy, polypectomy, and cancer protection are of critical importance.

Diagnostic performance of narrowed spectrum endoscopy, autofluorescence imaging, and confocal laser endomicroscopy for optical diagnosis of colonic polyps: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Novel endoscopic technologies could allow optical diagnosis and resection of colonic polyps without histopathological testing. Our aim was to establish the sensitivity, specificity, and real-time negative predictive value of three types of narrowed spectrum endoscopy (narrow-band imaging [NBI], image-enhanced endoscopy [i-scan], and Fujinon intelligent chromoendoscopy [FICE]), confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), and autofluorescence imaging for differentiation between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colonic lesions.

METHODS

We identified relevant studies through a search of Medline, Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library. Clinical trials and observational studies were eligible for inclusion when the diagnostic performance of NBI, i-scan, FICE, autofluorescence imaging, or CLE had been assessed for differentiation, with histopathology as the reference standard, and for which a 2 × 2 contingency table of lesion diagnosis could be constructed. We did a random-effects bivariate meta-analysis using a non-linear mixed model approach to calculate summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity, and plotted estimates in a summary receiver-operating characteristic curve.

FINDINGS

We included 91 studies in our analysis: 56 were of NBI, ten of i-scan, 14 of FICE, 11 of CLE, and 11 of autofluorescence imaging (more than one of the investigated modalities assessed in eight studies). For NBI, overall sensitivity was 91·0% (95% CI 88·6-93·0), specificity 85·6% (81·3-89·0), and real-time negative predictive value 82·5% (75·4-87·9). For i-scan, overall sensitivity was 89·3% (83·3-93·3), specificity 88·2% (80·3-93·2), and real-time negative predictive value 86·5% (78·0-92·1). For FICE, overall sensitivity was 91·8% (87·1-94·9), specificity 83·5% (77·2-88·3), and real-time negative predictive value 83·7% (77·5-88·4). For autofluorescence imaging, overall sensitivity was 86·7% (79·5-91·6), specificity 65·9% (50·9-78·2), and real-time negative predictive value 81·5% (54·0-94·3). For CLE, overall sensitivity was 93·3% (88·4-96·2), specificity 89·9% (81·8-94·6), and real-time negative predictive value 94·8% (86·6-98·1).

INTERPRETATION

All endoscopic imaging techniques other than autofluorescence imaging could be used by appropriately trained endoscopists to make a reliable optical diagnosis for colonic lesions in daily practice. Further research should be focused on whether training could help to improve negative predictive values.

FUNDING

None.

Optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using high-definition i-scan: An educational experience

AIM: To examine performances regarding prediction of polyp histology using high-definition (HD) i-scan in a group of endoscopists with varying levels of experience.

METHODS: We used a digital library of HD i-scan still images, comprising twin pictures (surface enhancement and tone enhancement), collected at our university hospital. We defined endoscopic features of adenomatous and non-adenomatous polyps, according to the following parameters: color, surface pattern and vascular pattern. We familiarized the participating endoscopists on optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using a 20-min didactic training session. All endoscopists were asked to evaluate an image set of 50 colorectal polyps with regard to polyp histology. We classified the diagnoses into high confidence (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist could assign a diagnosis with certainty) and low confidence diagnoses (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist preferred to send the polyp for formal histology). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy per endoscopist/image were computed and differences between groups tested using independent-samples t tests. High vs low confidence diagnoses were compared using the paired-samples t test.

RESULTS: Eleven endoscopists without previous experience on optical diagnosis evaluated a total of 550 images (396 adenomatous, 154 non-adenomatous). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing adenomas were 79.3%, 85.7% and 81.1%, respectively. No significant differences were found between gastroenterologists and trainees regarding performances of optical diagnosis (mean accuracy 78.0% vs 82.9%, P = 0.098). Diminutive lesions were predicted with a lower mean accuracy as compared to non-diminutive lesions (74.2% vs 93.1%, P = 0.008). A total of 446 (81.1%) diagnoses were made with high confidence. High confidence diagnoses corresponded to a significantly higher mean accuracy than low confidence diagnoses (84.0% vs 64.3%, P = 0.008). A total of 319 (58.0%) images were evaluated as having excellent quality. Considering excellent quality images in conjunction with high confidence diagnosis, overall accuracy increased to 92.8%.

CONCLUSION: After a single training session, endoscopists with varying levels of experience can already provide optical diagnosis with an accuracy of 84.0%.