Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Lancet Digit Health ; 6(5): e345-e353, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38670743

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Capsule endoscopy reading is time consuming, and readers are required to maintain attention so as not to miss significant findings. Deep convolutional neural networks can recognise relevant findings, possibly exceeding human performances and reducing the reading time of capsule endoscopy. Our primary aim was to assess the non-inferiority of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted reading versus standard reading for potentially small bowel bleeding lesions (high P2, moderate P1; Saurin classification) at per-patient analysis. The mean reading time in both reading modalities was evaluated among the secondary endpoints. METHODS: Patients aged 18 years or older with suspected small bowel bleeding (with anaemia with or without melena or haematochezia, and negative bidirectional endoscopy) were prospectively enrolled at 14 European centres. Patients underwent small bowel capsule endoscopy with the Navicam SB system (Ankon, China), which is provided with a deep neural network-based AI system (ProScan) for automatic detection of lesions. Initial reading was performed in standard reading mode. Second blinded reading was performed with AI assistance (the AI operated a first-automated reading, and only AI-selected images were assessed by human readers). The primary endpoint was to assess the non-inferiority of AI-assisted reading versus standard reading in the detection (diagnostic yield) of potentially small bowel bleeding P1 and P2 lesions in a per-patient analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04821349. FINDINGS: From Feb 17, 2021 to Dec 29, 2021, 137 patients were prospectively enrolled. 133 patients were included in the final analysis (73 [55%] female, mean age 66·5 years [SD 14·4]; 112 [84%] completed capsule endoscopy). At per-patient analysis, the diagnostic yield of P1 and P2 lesions in AI-assisted reading (98 [73·7%] of 133 lesions) was non-inferior (p<0·0001) and superior (p=0·0213) to standard reading (82 [62·4%] of 133; 95% CI 3·6-19·0). Mean small bowel reading time was 33·7 min (SD 22·9) in standard reading and 3·8 min (3·3) in AI-assisted reading (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: AI-assisted reading might provide more accurate and faster detection of clinically relevant small bowel bleeding lesions than standard reading. FUNDING: ANKON Technologies, China and AnX Robotica, USA provided the NaviCam SB system.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Capsule Endoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Intestine, Small , Humans , Capsule Endoscopy/methods , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Prospective Studies , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Intestine, Small/diagnostic imaging , Intestine, Small/pathology , Aged , Adult , Aged, 80 and over , Neural Networks, Computer
2.
Endoscopy ; 56(3): 174-181, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37949103

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) has become a well-established diagnostic and therapeutic tool for the management of small-bowel pathology. We aimed to evaluate the performance measures for DAE across the UK against the quality benchmarks proposed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on patient demographics and DAE performance measures from electronic endoscopy records of consecutive patients who underwent DAE for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes across 12 enteroscopy centers in the UK between January 2017 and December 2022. RESULTS: A total of 2005 DAE procedures were performed in 1663 patients (median age 60 years; 53% men). Almost all procedures (98.1%) were performed for appropriate indications. Double-balloon enteroscopy was used for most procedures (82.0%), followed by single-balloon enteroscopy (17.2%) and spiral enteroscopy (0.7%). The estimated depth of insertion was documented in 73.4% of procedures. The overall diagnostic yield was 70.0%. Therapeutic interventions were performed in 42.6% of procedures, with a success rate of 96.6%. Overall, 78.0% of detected lesions were marked with a tattoo. Patient comfort was significantly better with the use of deep sedation compared with conscious sedation (99.7% vs. 68.5%; P<0.001). Major adverse events occurred in only 0.6% of procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Performance measures for DAE in the UK meet the ESGE quality benchmarks, with high diagnostic and therapeutic yields, and a low incidence of major adverse events. However, there is room for improvement in optimizing sedation practices, standardizing the depth of insertion documentation, and adopting marking techniques to aid in the follow-up of detected lesions.


Subject(s)
Intestinal Diseases , Male , Humans , Middle Aged , Female , Intestinal Diseases/diagnosis , Intestinal Diseases/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Quality Improvement , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods , Intestine, Small/diagnostic imaging , Intestine, Small/pathology , Double-Balloon Enteroscopy/methods
4.
Gut ; 64(12): 1847-73, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26104751

ABSTRACT

These guidelines provide an evidence-based framework for the management of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), in addition to identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) that permit the audit of quality outcomes. These are areas not previously covered by British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Guidelines.A National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant BSG guideline development process was used throughout and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to structure the guideline development process. A systematic review of literature was conducted for English language articles up to May 2014 concerning the assessment and management of LNPCPs. Quality of evaluated studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist System. Proposed recommendation statements were evaluated by each member of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) on a scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) with >80% agreement required for consensus to be reached. Where consensus was not reached a modified Delphi process was used to re-evaluate and modify proposed statements until consensus was reached or the statement discarded. A round table meeting was subsequently held to finalise recommendations and to evaluate the strength of evidence discussed. The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements.KPIs, a training framework and potential research questions for the management of LNPCPs were also developed. It is hoped that these guidelines will improve the assessment and management of LNPCPs.


Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Rectal Diseases/pathology , Rectal Diseases/surgery , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Colonic Polyps/therapy , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Ireland , Patient Education as Topic , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Rectal Diseases/therapy , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...