Advertisement
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Advanced SearchSave search
Full length article|Articles in Press

COMPUTER-ASSISTED DETECTION VERSUS CONVENTIONAL COLONOSCOPY FOR PROXIMAL COLONIC LESIONS: A MULTI-CENTER, RANDOMIZED, TANDEM COLONOSCOPY STUDY

Published:October 05, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2022.09.020
COMPUTER-ASSISTED DETECTION VERSUS CONVENTIONAL COLONOSCOPY FOR PROXIMAL COLONIC LESIONS: A MULTI-CENTER, RANDOMIZED, TANDEM COLONOSCOPY STUDY
Previous ArticleSoft Self-expanding Metal Stent to Treat Painful Pancreatic Duct Strictures Secondary to Chronic Pancreatitis: A Prospective Multicenter Trial
Next ArticleA NOVEL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR WALLED-OFF NECROSIS: A STEP TOWARD STANDARDIZED NOMENCLATURE AND RISK STRATIFICATION FRAMEWORK
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      ABSTRACT

      Background and Aims

      Computer-assisted detection (CADe) is a promising technological 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.

      Method

      This was a prospective multi-center randomized tandem colonoscopy study conducted in three 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.

      Result

      223 patients (48.6% male, median age 63 years) were enrolled and 7 patients did not have tandem examination, leaving 108 patients in each group. There was no difference in the miss rate for proximal adenoma (CADe vs conventional: 20.0% vs 14.0%, P=0.07) and polyp (26.7% vs 19.6%, P=0.06). The CADe group however had significantly higher proximal polyp (58.0% vs 46.7%; P=0.03) and adenoma (44.7% vs 34.6%; P=0.04) detection rates than the conventional group. The mean number of proximal polyp and adenoma detected per patient during first examination were also significantly higher in the CADe group (polyp: 1.20 vs 0.86; P =0.03; adenoma: 0.91 vs 0.61; P =0.03). 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.

      Conclusion

      This multi-center trial from Asia confirmed that CADe can further enhance proximal adenoma and polyp detection, but may not be able to reduce missed proximal colonic lesions.
      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
      Register: Create an account
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      Article Info

      Publication History

      Accepted: September 23, 2022
      Received in revised form: August 15, 2022
      Received: June 7, 2022

      Publication stage

      In Press Journal Pre-Proof

      Footnotes

      Author Contributions:

      WKL was involved in the study design and conception; interpretation of the data; drafting of manuscript and study supervision. DVH and SKKT were involved in the data acquisition and critical review of the manuscript. CKYH, VWMT, MKSC, MKLK, LLYM, MYT, RL and LVD were involved in the data acquisition. CKY was involved in the development of AI location model .TKLT was involved in the study design, conception, data analysis and drafting of the manuscript and the development of AI location model.

      Financial support: None

      Conflict of interest Disclosure:

      The following authors disclosed financial relationships: W.K. Leung: Advisory committee for NISI(HK) Limited and consultant for Medtronic. CK Yeung: Founder of NISI(HK) Limited. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships.

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2022.09.020

      Copyright

      © 2022 by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect
      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the for this site.
      Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties. The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      RELX