Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Colonoscopy Surveillance After Polyp Removal: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools aimed at improving polyp detection have been shown to increase the adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy. However, it is unknown how increased polyp detection rates by AI affect the burden of patient surveillance after polyp removal. METHODS: We conducted a pooled analysis of 9 randomized controlled trials (5 in China, 2 in Italy, 1 in Japan, and 1 in the United States) comparing colonoscopy with or without AI detection aids. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients recommended to undergo intensive surveillance (ie, 3-year interval). We analyzed intervals for AI and non-AI colonoscopies for the U.S. and European recommendations separately. We estimated proportions by calculating relative risks using the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: A total of 5796 patients (51% male, mean 53 years of age) were included; 2894 underwent AI-assisted colonoscopy and 2902 non-AI colonoscopy. When following U.S. guidelines, the proportion of patients recommended intensive surveillance increased from 8.4% (95% CI, 7.4%-9.5%) in the non-AI group to 11.3% (95% CI, 10.2%-12.6%) in the AI group (absolute difference, 2.9% [95% CI, 1.4%-4.4%]; risk ratio, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16-1.57]). When following European guidelines, it increased from 6.1% (95% CI, 5.3%-7.0%) to 7.4% (95% CI, 6.5%-8.4%) (absolute difference, 1.3% [95% CI, 0.01%-2.6%]; risk ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.01-1.47]). CONCLUSIONS: The use of AI during colonoscopy increased the proportion of patients requiring intensive colonoscopy surveillance by approximately 35% in the United States and 20% in Europe (absolute increases of 2.9% and 1.3%, respectively). While this may contribute to improved cancer prevention, it significantly adds patient burden and healthcare costs.

Combined endocytoscopy with pit pattern diagnosis in ulcerative colitis-associated neoplasia: Pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: Ulcerative colitis-associated neoplasias (UCAN) are often flat with an indistinct boundary from surrounding tissues, which makes differentiating UCAN from non-neoplasias difficult. Pit pattern (PIT) has been reported as one of the most effective indicators to identify UCAN. However, regenerated mucosa is also often diagnosed as a neoplastic PIT. Endocytoscopy (EC) allows visualization of cell nuclei. The aim of this retrospective study was to demonstrate the diagnostic ability of combined EC irregularly-formed nuclei with PIT (EC-IN-PIT) diagnosis to identify UCAN. METHODS: This study involved patients with ulcerative colitis whose lesions were observed by EC. Each lesion was diagnosed by two independent expert endoscopists, using two types of diagnostic strategies: PIT alone and EC-IN-PIT. We evaluated and compared the diagnostic abilities of PIT alone and EC-IN-PIT. We also examined the difference in the diagnostic abilities of an EC-IN-PIT diagnosis according to endoscopic inflammation severity. RESULTS: We analyzed 103 lesions from 62 patients; 23 lesions were UCAN and 80 were non-neoplastic. EC-IN-PIT diagnosis had a significantly higher specificity and accuracy compared with PIT alone: 84% versus 58% (P < 0.001), and 88% versus 67% (P < 0.01), respectively. The specificity and accuracy were significantly higher for Mayo endoscopic score (MES) 0-1 than MES 2-3: 93% versus 68% (P < 0.001) and 95% versus 74% (P < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel EC-IN-PIT strategy had a better diagnostic ability than PIT alone to predict UCAN from suspected and initially detected lesions using conventional colonoscopy. UMIN clinical trial (UMIN000040698).

Impact of the clinical use of artificial intelligence-assisted neoplasia detection for colonoscopy: a large-scale prospective, propensity score-matched study (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recently, the use of computer-aided detection (CADe) for colonoscopy has been investigated to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We aimed to assess the efficacy of a regulatory-approved CADe in a large-scale study with high numbers of patients and endoscopists. METHODS: This was a propensity score-matched prospective study that took place at a university hospital between July 2020 and December 2020. We recruited patients aged ≥20 years who were scheduled for colonoscopy. Patients with polyposis, inflammatory bowel disease, or incomplete colonoscopy were excluded. We used a regulatory-approved CADe system and conducted a propensity score matching-based comparison of the ADR between patients examined with and without CADe as the primary outcome. RESULTS: During the study period, 2261 patients underwent colonoscopy with the CADe system or routine colonoscopy, and 172 patients were excluded in accordance with the exclusion criteria. Thirty endoscopists (9 nonexperts and 21 experts) were involved in this study. Propensity score matching was conducted using 5 factors, resulting in 1836 patients included in the analysis (918 patients in each group). The ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (26.4% vs 19.9%, respectively; relative risk, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.57); however, there was no significant increase in the advanced neoplasia detection rate (3.7% vs 2.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the CADe system for colonoscopy significantly increased the ADR in a large-scale prospective study including 30 endoscopists (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000040677.).