Improvement in adenoma detection rate by artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: Multicenter quasi-randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.2 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2025-02-26 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2521-5169
Ronja Maria Birgitta Lagström, Karoline Bendix Bräuner, Julia Bielik, Andreas Weinberger Rosen, Julie Gräs Crone, Ismail Gögenur, Mustafa Bulut
{"title":"Improvement in adenoma detection rate by artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: Multicenter quasi-randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Ronja Maria Birgitta Lagström, Karoline Bendix Bräuner, Julia Bielik, Andreas Weinberger Rosen, Julie Gräs Crone, Ismail Gögenur, Mustafa Bulut","doi":"10.1055/a-2521-5169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key performance measure with variability among endoscopists. Artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopy could reduce this variability and has shown to improve ADR. This study assessed the impact of AI on ADR among Danish endoscopists of varying experience levels.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective, quasi-randomized, controlled, multicenter trial involving patients aged 18 and older undergoing screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopy at four centers. Participants were assigned to AI-assisted colonoscopy (GI Genius, Medtronic) or conventional colonoscopy. Endoscopists were classified as experts (> 1000 colonoscopies) or non-experts (≤ 1000 colonoscopies). The primary outcome was ADR. We performed a subgroup analysis stratified on endoscopist experience and a subset analysis of the screening population.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 795 patients were analyzed: 400 in the AI group and 395 in the control group. The AI group demonstrated a significantly higher ADR than the control group (59.1% vs. 46.6%, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The increase was significant among experts (59.9% vs. 47.3%, <i>P</i> < 0.002) but not among non-experts. AI assistance significantly improved ADR (74.4% vs. 58.1%, <i>P</i> = 0.003) in screening colonoscopies. Polyp detection rate (PDR) was also higher in the AI group (69.8% vs. 56.2%, <i>P</i> < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the non-neoplastic resection rate (NNRR) (15.1% vs. 17.1%, <i>P</i> = 0.542).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI-assisted colonoscopy significantly increased ADR by 12.5% overall, with a notable 16.3% increase in the screening population. The unchanged NNRR indicates that the higher PDR was due to increased ADR, not unnecessary resections.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"13 ","pages":"a25215169"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11866038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2521-5169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and study aims: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key performance measure with variability among endoscopists. Artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopy could reduce this variability and has shown to improve ADR. This study assessed the impact of AI on ADR among Danish endoscopists of varying experience levels.

Patients and methods: We conducted a prospective, quasi-randomized, controlled, multicenter trial involving patients aged 18 and older undergoing screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopy at four centers. Participants were assigned to AI-assisted colonoscopy (GI Genius, Medtronic) or conventional colonoscopy. Endoscopists were classified as experts (> 1000 colonoscopies) or non-experts (≤ 1000 colonoscopies). The primary outcome was ADR. We performed a subgroup analysis stratified on endoscopist experience and a subset analysis of the screening population.

Results: A total of 795 patients were analyzed: 400 in the AI group and 395 in the control group. The AI group demonstrated a significantly higher ADR than the control group (59.1% vs. 46.6%, P < 0.001). The increase was significant among experts (59.9% vs. 47.3%, P < 0.002) but not among non-experts. AI assistance significantly improved ADR (74.4% vs. 58.1%, P = 0.003) in screening colonoscopies. Polyp detection rate (PDR) was also higher in the AI group (69.8% vs. 56.2%, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the non-neoplastic resection rate (NNRR) (15.1% vs. 17.1%, P = 0.542).

Conclusions: AI-assisted colonoscopy significantly increased ADR by 12.5% overall, with a notable 16.3% increase in the screening population. The unchanged NNRR indicates that the higher PDR was due to increased ADR, not unnecessary resections.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Endoscopy International Open
Endoscopy International Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
3.80%
发文量
270
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and safety of H-APC in Barrett's esophagus: Italian prospective multicenter study. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting vs percutaneous cholecystostomy for managing acute cholecystitis: Nationwide propensity score study. Hybrid percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (Hybrid PEG) improves patient safety by combining pull-through technique with gastropexy. Improvement in adenoma detection rate by artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: Multicenter quasi-randomized controlled trial. Pediatric cylindrical battery ingestion.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1