Advertisement

Computer-assisted detection versus conventional colonoscopy for proximal colonic lesions: a multicenter, randomized, tandem-colonoscopy study

Published:October 05, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2022.09.020

      Background and Aims

      Computer-assisted detection (CADe) is a promising technologic advance that enhances adenoma detection during colonoscopy. However, the role of CADe in reducing missed colonic lesions is uncertain. The aim of this study was to determine the miss rates of proximal colonic lesions by CADe and conventional colonoscopy.

      Methods

      This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, tandem-colonoscopy study conducted in 3 Asian centers. Patients were randomized to receive CADe or conventional white-light colonoscopy during the first withdrawal of the proximal colon (cecum to splenic flexure), immediately followed by tandem examination of the proximal colon with white light in both groups. The primary outcome was adenoma/polyp miss rate, which was defined as any adenoma/polyp detected during the second examination.

      Results

      Of 223 patients (48.6% men; median age, 63 years) enrolled, 7 patients did not have tandem examination, leaving 108 patients in each group. There was no difference in the miss rate for proximal adenomas (CADe vs conventional: 20.0% vs 14.0%, P = .07) and polyps (26.7% vs 19.6%, P = .06). The CADe group, however, had significantly higher proximal polyp (58.0% vs 46.7%, P = .03) and adenoma (44.7% vs 34.6%, P = .04) detection rates than the conventional group. The mean number of proximal polyps and adenomas detected per patient during the first examination was also significantly higher in the CADe group (polyp: 1.20 vs .86, P = .03; adenoma, .91 vs .61, P = .03). Subgroup analysis showed that CADe enhanced proximal adenoma detection in patients with fair bowel preparation, shorter withdrawal time, and endoscopists with lower adenoma detection rate.

      Conclusions

      This multicenter trial from Asia confirmed that CADe can further enhance proximal adenoma and polyp detection but may not be able to reduce the number of missed proximal colonic lesions. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04294355.)

      Abbreviations:

      ADR (adenoma detection rate), aOR (adjusted odds ratio), BBPS (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale), CADe (computer-assisted detection), CI (confidence interval), CRC (colorectal cancer)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Fitzmaurice C.
        • Abate D.
        • Abbasi N.
        • et al.
        Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years for 29 cancer groups, 1990 to 2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study.
        JAMA Oncol. 2019; 5: 1749-1768
        • Ngan R.K.C.
        Overview of Hong Kong Cancer Statistics of 2014.
        Hong Kong Cancer Registry Hospital Authority, 2016 (Available at: https://www3.ha.org.hk/cancereg/pdf/overview/Overview%20of%20HK%20Cancer%20Stat%202014.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2022)
        • Sung H.
        • Ferlay J.
        • Siegel R.L.
        • et al.
        Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71: 209-249
        • Hong S.N.
        • Sung I.K.
        • Kim J.H.
        • et al.
        The effect of the bowel preparation status on the risk of missing polyp and adenoma during screening colonoscopy: a tandem colonoscopic study.
        Clin Endosc. 2012; 45: 404-411
        • Zhao S.
        • Wang S.
        • Pan P.
        • et al.
        Magnitude, risk factors, and factors associated with adenoma miss rate of tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Gastroenterology. 2019; 156: 1661-1674
        • Lui T.K.L.
        • Guo C.G.
        • Leung W.K.
        Accuracy of artificial intelligence on histology prediction and detection of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Gastrointest Endos. 2020; 92: 11-22
        • Barua I.
        • Vinsard D.G.
        • Jodal H.C.
        • et al.
        Artificial intelligence for polyp detection during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Endoscopy. 2021; 53: 277-284
        • Wang A.
        • Mo J.
        • Zhong C.
        • et al.
        Artificial intelligence-assisted detection and classification of colorectal polyps under colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Ann Transl Med. 2021; 9: 1662
        • Ashat M.
        • Klair J.S.
        • Singh D.
        • et al.
        Impact of real-time use of artificial intelligence in improving adenoma detection during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Endosc Int Open. 2021; 9: E513-E521
        • Huang D.
        • Shen J.
        • Hong J.
        • et al.
        Effect of artificial intelligence-aided colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
        Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021; 37: 495-506
        • Deliwala S.S.
        • Hamid K.
        • Barbarawi M.
        • et al.
        Artificial intelligence (AI) real-time detection vs. routine colonoscopy for colorectal neoplasia: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
        Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021; 36: 2291-2303
        • Wang P.
        • Berzin T.M.
        • Glissen Brown J.R.
        • et al.
        Real-time automatic detection system increases colonoscopic polyp and adenoma detection rates: a prospective randomised controlled study.
        Gut. 2019; 68: 1813-1819
        • Wang P.
        • Liu X.G.
        • Berzin T.M.
        • et al.
        Effect of a deep-learning computer-aided detection system on adenoma detection during colonoscopy (CADe-DB trial): a double-blind randomised study.
        Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 5: 343-351
        • Repici A.
        • Badalamenti M.
        • Maselli R.
        • et al.
        Efficacy of real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal neoplasia in a randomized trial.
        Gastroenterology. 2020; 159: 512-520
        • Gong D.
        • Wu L.
        • Zhang J.
        Detection of colorectal adenomas with a real-time computer-aided system (ENDOANGEL): a randomised controlled study.
        Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 5: 352-361
        • Su J.R.
        • Li Z.
        • Shao X.J.
        • et al.
        Impact of a real-time automatic quality control system on colorectal polyp and adenoma detection: a prospective randomized controlled study (with videos).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2020; 91: 415-424
        • Wang P.
        • Liu P.
        • Glissen Brown J.R.
        • et al.
        Lower adenoma miss rate of computer-aided detection-assisted colonoscopy vs routine white-light colonoscopy in a prospective tandem study.
        Gastroenterology. 2020; 159: 1252-1261
        • Lui T.K.
        • Hui C.K.
        • Tsui V.W.
        • et al.
        New insights on missed colonic lesions during colonoscopy through artificial intelligence-assisted real-time detection (with video).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2020; 93: 193-200
        • Jung Y.
        • Joo Y.E.
        • Kim H.G.
        • et al.
        Relationship between the endoscopic withdrawal time and adenoma/polyp detection rate in individual colonic segments: a KASID multicenter study.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2019; 89: 523-530
      1. He K, Zhang K, Ren S, et al. Deep residual learning for image recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 2016. p. 770-8. Available at: https://www.cv-foundation.org/openaccess/content_cvpr_2016/papers/He_Deep_Residual_Learning_CVPR_2016_paper.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2022.

      2. Singh BLH, Sharma A, Davis LS. R-FCN-3000 at 30fps: Decoupling detection and classification. Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 2018. p. 1081-90. Available at: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2018/papers/Singh_R-FCN-3000_at_30fps_CVPR_2018_paper.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2022.

        • Silva J.
        • Histace A.
        • Romain O.
        • et al.
        Toward embedded detection of polyps in WCE images for early diagnosis of colorectal cancer.
        Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2014; 9: 283-293
      3. Lin T, Maire M, Belongie S. Microsoft COCO: common objects in context. Computer Vision—European Conference on Computer Vision, 2014. p. 740-55. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.0312. Accessed November 19, 2022.

        • Nagtegaal I.D.
        • Odze R.D.
        • Klimstra D.
        • et al.
        The 2019 WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system.
        Histopathology. 2020; 76: 182-188
        • Ikematsu H.
        • Saito Y.
        • Tanaka S.
        • et al.
        The impact of narrow band imaging for colon polyp detection: a multicenter randomized controlled trial by tandem colonoscopy.
        J Gastroenterol. 2012; 47: 1099-1107
        • Adler A.
        • Aschenbeck J.
        • Yenerim T.
        • et al.
        Narrow-band versus white-light high definition television endoscopic imaging for screening colonoscopy: a prospective randomized trial.
        Gastroenterology. 2009; 136 (quiz 715): 410-416
        • Inoue T.
        • Murano M.
        • Murano N.
        • et al.
        Comparative study of conventional colonoscopy and pan-colonic narrow-band imaging system in the detection of neoplastic colonic polyps: a randomized, controlled trial.
        J Gastroenterol. 2008; 43: 45-50
        • Adler A.
        • Pohl H.
        • Papanikolaou I.S.
        • et al.
        A prospective randomised study on narrow-band imaging versus conventional colonoscopy for adenoma detection: does narrow-band imaging induce a learning effect?.
        Gut. 2008; 57: 59-64
        • Wallace M.B.
        • Sharma P.
        • Bhandari P.
        • et al.
        Impact of artificial intelligence on miss rate of colorectal neoplasia.
        Gastroenterology. 2022; 163: 295-304.e5
        • Glissen Brown J.R.
        • Mansour N.M.
        • Wang P.
        • et al.
        Deep learning computer-aided polyp detection reduces adenoma miss rate: a United States multi-center randomized tandem colonoscopy study (CADeT-CS trial).
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 30: 1499-1507.e4
        • Jellema P.
        • van der Windt D.A.
        • Bruinvels D.J.
        • et al.
        Value of symptoms and additional diagnostic tests for colorectal cancer in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis.
        BMJ. 2010; 340: c1269
        • Lu R.
        • Kassim T.
        • Dave D.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic yield of colonoscopy in young adults with lower gastrointestinal symptoms in a multicenter Midwest cohort.
        Dig Dis. 2020; 38: 484-489
        • Cha J.M.
        • Kozarek R.A.
        • La Selva D.
        • et al.
        Findings of diagnostic colonoscopy in young adults versus findings of screening colonoscopy in patients aged 50 to 54 years: a comparative study stratified by symptom category.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 82: 138-145