Impact of linked-color imaging on colorectal adenoma detection

Impact of linked color imaging on the proximal adenoma miss rate: a multicenter tandem randomized controlled trial (the COCORICO trial)

BACKGROUND

Missed lesions are common during standard colonoscopy and are correlated with post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Contrast-enhanced technologies have recently been developed to improve polyp detection. We aimed to evaluate the impact of linked color imaging (LCI) on the proximal adenoma miss rate in routine colonoscopy.

METHODS

This national, multicenter, tandem, randomized trial compared the outcomes of colonoscopy with white-light imaging (WLI) versus LCI for polyp detection in the right colon. Two consecutive examinations of the right colon (upstream of the hepatic flexure) were made with WLI and LCI by the same operator. First-pass examination by WLI or LCI was randomized 1:1 after cecal intubation. According to statistical calculations, 10 endoscopy units had to include approximately 700 patients. The primary outcome was proximal adenoma miss rate. Secondary outcomes were the proximal miss rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL), advanced adenomas, and polyps.

RESULTS

764 patients were included from 1 January 2020 to 22 December 2022, and 686 patients were randomized (345 WLI first vs. 341 LCI first). Both groups were comparable in terms of demographics and indications. The proximal adenoma miss rate was not significantly higher in the WLI-first group (36.7%) vs. the LCI-first group (31.8%) (estimated mean absolute difference: 4.9% [95%CI -5.2% to 15.0%], P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in miss rates for SSLs, advanced adenomas, and polyps in the proximal colon.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to previous data, this study does not support the benefit of LCI to the proximal adenoma miss rate in routine colonoscopy.

Linked-color imaging with or without artificial intelligence for adenoma detection: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important indicator of colonoscopy quality and colorectal cancer incidence. Both linked-color imaging (LCI) with artificial intelligence (LCA) and LCI alone increase adenoma detection during colonoscopy, although it remains unclear whether one modality is superior. This study compared ADR between LCA and LCI alone, including according to endoscopists' experience (experts and trainees) and polyp size.

METHODS

Patients undergoing colonoscopy for positive fecal immunochemical tests, follow-up of colon polyps, and abdominal symptoms at a single institution were randomly assigned to the LCA or LCI group. ADR, adenoma per colonoscopy (APC), cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, number of adenomas per location, and adenoma size were compared.

RESULTS

The LCA (n=400) and LCI (n=400) groups showed comparable cecal intubation and withdrawal times. The LCA group showed a significantly higher ADR (58.8% vs. 43.5%; P<0.001) and mean (95%CI) APC (1.31 [1.15 to 1.47] vs. 0.94 [0.80 to 1.07]; P<0.001), particularly in the ascending colon (0.30 [0.24 to 0.36] vs. 0.20 [0.15 to 0.25]; P=0.02). Total number of nonpolypoid-type adenomas was also significantly higher in the LCA group (0.15 [0.09 to 0.20] vs. 0.08 [0.05 to 0.10]; P=0.02). Small polyps (≤5, 6-9mm) were detected significantly more frequently in the LCA group (0.75 [0.64 to 0.86] vs. 0.48 [0.40 to 0.57], P<0.001 and 0.34 [0.26 to 0.41] vs. 0.24 [0.18 to 0.29], P=0.04, respectively). In both groups, ADR was not significantly different between experts and trainees.

CONCLUSIONS

LCA was significantly superior to LCI alone in terms of ADR.

Analysis of the Characteristics of Coexisting Lesions in Colorectal Cancer Patients in an International Study: A Subgroup Analysis of the ATLAS Trial

INTRODUCTION

We investigated coexisting lesion types in patients with invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) in a multinational study for comprehending the adenoma-carcinoma and serrated pathway about the development of CRC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 3,050 patients enrolled in the international randomized controlled trial (ATLAS study) to evaluate the colorectal polyp detection performance of image-enhanced endoscopy in 11 institutions in four Asian countries/regions. In the current study, as a subgroup analysis of the ATLAS study, 92 CRC patients were extracted and compared to 2,958 patients without CRC to examine the effects of age, sex, and coexisting lesion types (high-grade adenoma [HGA], low-grade adenoma with villous component [LGAV], 10 adenomas, adenoma ≥10 mm, sessile serrated lesions [SSLs], and SSLs with dysplasia [SSLD]). Additional analyses of coexisting lesion types were performed according to sex and location of CRC (right- or left-sided).

RESULTS

A multivariate analysis showed that HGA (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 4.29 [2.16-8.18]; p < 0.01), LGAV (3.02 [1.16-7.83], p = 0.02), and age (1.04 [1.01-1.06], p = 0.01) were independently associated with CRC. According to sex, the coexisting lesion types significantly associated with CRC were LGAV (5.58 [1.94-16.0], p < 0.01) and HGA (4.46 [1.95-10.20], p < 0.01) in males and HGA (4.82 [1.47-15.80], p < 0.01) in females. Regarding the location of CRC, SSLD (21.9 [1.31-365.0], p = 0.03) was significant for right-sided CRC, and HGA (5.22 [2.39-11.4], p < 0.01) and LGAV (3.46 [1.13-10.6], p = 0.02) were significant for left-sided CRC.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant coexisting lesions in CRC differed according to sex and location. These findings may contribute to comprehending the pathogenesis of CRC.

Linked-color imaging versus high definition white-light endoscopy for evaluation of post-polypectomy scars of nonpedunculated lesions: LCI-Scar study

BACKGROUND

Detection and treatment of recurrence after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps are crucial for avoidance of post-colonoscopy cancer. Linked-color imaging (LCI) has demonstrated improved polyp detection but has never been assessed for evaluation of post-polypectomy scars. Our aim was to compare sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) between LCI and white-light endoscopy (WLE) for detection of post-polypectomy recurrence.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surveillance colonoscopy after resection of lesions ≥15 mm were included in this prospective, single-center, randomized, crossover study. Each post-polypectomy scar underwent two examinations, one with LCI and the other with WLE, performed by two blinded endoscopists. Blue-light imaging (BLI) was then applied. A diagnosis of recurrence with a level of confidence was made for each modality and histopathology was the gold standard.

RESULTS

129 patients with 173 scars were included. Baseline patient, lesion, and procedural characteristics were similar in both arms. Recurrence was detected in 56/173 (32.4%), with 27/56 (48.2%) adenomas and 29/56 (51.8%) serrated lesions. LCI had greater sensitivity (96.4% [95%CI 87.8%-99.5%]) versus WLE (89.3% [95%CI 78.1%-95.9%]) and greater NPV (98.1% [95%CI 93.4%-99.8%] versus 94.6% [95%CI 88.7%-98.0%]). Paired concordance between modalities was 96.0%. In discordant cases, LCI identified four true-positive cases not detected by WLE and reclassified one false-positive of WLE. WLE reclassified two false positives of LCI without any increase in recurrence detection.

CONCLUSIONS

LCI was highly accurate and had greater ability than WLE to rule out recurrence on post-polypectomy scars after resection of large polyps.

Impact of an artificial intelligence-aided endoscopic diagnosis system on improving endoscopy quality for trainees in colonoscopy: Prospective, randomized, multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to evaluate whether the use of CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) for colonoscopy improves colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees.

METHODS

The patients in this multicenter randomized controlled trial were divided into Group A (observation using CAD EYE) and Group B (standard observation). Six trainees performed colonoscopies using a back-to-back method in pairs with gastroenterology experts. The primary end-point was the trainees' adenoma detection rate (ADR), and the secondary end-points were the trainees' adenoma miss rate (AMR) and Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) tool scores. Each trainee's learning curve was evaluated using a cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart.

RESULTS

We analyzed data for 231 patients (Group A, n = 113; Group B, n = 118). The ADR was not significantly different between the two groups. Group A had a significantly lower AMR (25.6% vs. 38.6%, P = 0.033) and number of missed adenomas per patient (0.5 vs. 0.9, P = 0.004) than Group B. Group A also had significantly higher ACE tool scores for pathology identification (2.26 vs. 2.07, P = 0.030) and interpretation and identification of pathology location (2.18 vs. 2.00, P = 0.038). For the CUSUM learning curve, Group A showed a trend toward a lower number of cases of missed multiple adenomas by the six trainees.

CONCLUSION

CAD EYE did not improve ADR but decreased the AMR and improved the ability to accurately locate and identify colorectal adenomas. CAD EYE can be assumed to be beneficial for improving colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000044031).

Linked color imaging versus white light imaging in the diagnosis of colorectal lesions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Miss rate of colorectal neoplasia is associated with lesion histology, size, morphology, or location.

Objectives

We aim to compare the efficacy of Linked color imaging (LCI) versus white light imaging (WLI) for adenoma detection rate (ADR), the detection of sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), serrated lesions (SLs), advanced adenomas (AAs), diminutive lesions (DLs), and flat lesions (FLs) by using per-patient and per-lesion analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources and methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched through May 1st, 2023. We calculated risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference for continuous outcomes, and performed sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses.

Results

Overall, 17 RCTs (10,624 patients) were included. In per-patient analysis, ADR was higher in the LCI group versus the WLI group (p < 0.00001). This effect was consistent for SSL (p = 0.005), SLs (p = 0.01), AAs (p = 0.04), DLs (p < 0.00001), and FLs (p < 0.0001). In per-lesion analysis, LCI showed a significant superiority over WLI with regard to the mean number of adenomas per patient (p < 0.00001). This effect was in accordance with mean SSL (p = 0.001), mean SLs (p < 0.00001), and mean DLs (p < 0.0001) per patient. A subgroup analysis showed that the beneficial effect of the LCI group on the detection of AAs, SSL, and FLs was maintained only for studies when experts and trainees were included but not for experts only.

Conclusions

Meta-analyses of RCTs data support the use of LCI in clinical practice, especially for trainees.

Comparison of LED and LASER Colonoscopy About Linked Color Imaging and Blue Laser/Light Imaging of Colorectal Tumors in a Multinational Study

INTRODUCTION

In light-emitting diode (LED) and LASER colonoscopy, linked color imaging (LCI) and blue light/laser imaging (BLI) are used for lesion detection and characterization worldwide. We analyzed the difference of LCI and BLI images of colorectal lesions between LED and LASER in a multinational study.

METHODS

We prospectively observed lesions with white light imaging (WLI), LCI, and BLI using both LED and LASER colonoscopies from January 2020 to August 2021. Images were graded by 27 endoscopists from nine countries using the polyp visibility score: 4 (excellent), 3 (good), 2 (fair), and 1 (poor) and the comparison score (LED better/similar/LASER better) for WLI/LCI/BLI images of each lesion.

RESULTS

Finally, 32 lesions (polyp size: 20.0 ± 15.2 mm) including 9 serrated lesions, 13 adenomas, and 10 T1 cancers were evaluated. The polyp visibility scores of LCI/WLI for international and Japan-expert endoscopists were 3.17 ± 0.73/3.17 ± 0.79 (p = 0.92) and 3.34 ± 0.78/2.84 ± 1.22 (p < 0.01) for LED and 3.30 ± 0.71/3.12 ± 0.77 (p < 0.01) and 3.31 ± 0.82/2.78 ± 1.23 (p < 0.01) for LASER. Regarding the comparison of lesion visibility about between LED and LASER colonoscopy in international endoscopists, a significant difference was achieved not for WLI, but for LCI. The rates of LED better/similar/LASER better for brightness under WLI were 54.5%/31.6%/13.9% (International) and 75.0%/21.9%/3.1% (Japan expert). Those under LCI were 39.2%/35.4%/25.3% (International) and 31.3%/53.1%/15.6% (Japan expert). There were no significant differences in the diagnostic accuracy and the comparison score of BLI images between LED and LASER.

CONCLUSIONS

The differences of lesion visibility for WLI/LCI/BLI between LED and LASER in international endoscopists could be compared to those in Japanese endoscopists.

Detecting colorectal lesions with image-enhanced endoscopy: an updated review from clinical trials

Colonoscopy plays an important role in reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer by detecting adenomas and other precancerous lesions. Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) increases lesion visibility by enhancing the microstructure, blood vessels, and mucosal surface color, resulting in the detection of colorectal lesions. In recent years, various IEE techniques have been used in clinical practice, each with its unique characteristics. Numerous studies have reported the effectiveness of IEE in the detection of colorectal lesions. IEEs can be divided into two broad categories according to the nature of the image: images constructed using narrowband wavelength light, such as narrowband imaging and blue laser imaging/blue light imaging, or color images based on white light, such as linked color imaging, texture and color enhancement imaging, and i-scan. Conversely, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, such as computer-aided diagnosis systems, have recently been developed to assist endoscopists in detecting colorectal lesions during colonoscopy. To better understand the features of each IEE, this review presents the effectiveness of each type of IEE and their combination with AI for colorectal lesion detection by referencing the latest research data.

Performance of artificial intelligence in the characterization of colorectal lesions

Background

Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) has been used in the differentiation between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal lesions through microvasculature analysis. This study aimed to evaluate the computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) mode of the CAD EYE system for the optical diagnosis of colorectal lesions and compare it with the performance of an expert, in addition to evaluating the computer-aided detection (CADe) mode in terms of polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR).

Methods

A prospective study was conducted to evaluate the performance of CAD EYE using blue light imaging (BLI), dichotomizing lesions into hyperplastic and neoplastic, and of an expert based on the Japan Narrow-Band Imaging Expert Team (JNET) classification for the characterization of lesions. After white light imaging (WLI) diagnosis, magnification was used on all lesions, which were removed and examined histologically. Diagnostic criteria were evaluated, and PDR and ADR were calculated.

Results

A total of 110 lesions (80 (72.7%) dysplastic lesions and 30 (27.3%) nondysplastic lesions) were evaluated in 52 patients, with a mean lesion size of 4.3 mm. Artificial intelligence (AI) analysis showed 81.8% accuracy, 76.3% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity, 98.5% positive predictive value (PPV), and 60.4% negative predictive value (NPV). The kappa value was 0.61, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.87. Expert analysis showed 93.6% accuracy, 92.5% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity, 98.7% PPV, and 82.9% NPV. The kappa value was 0.85, and the AUC was 0.95. Overall, PDR was 67.6% and ADR was 45.9%.

Conclusions

The CADx mode showed good accuracy in characterizing colorectal lesions, but the expert assessment was superior in almost all diagnostic criteria. PDR and ADR were high.

Recent advances in devices and technologies that might prove revolutionary for colonoscopy procedures

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Adenoma detection rate (ADR), a quality indicator for colonoscopy, has gained prominence as it is inversely related to CRC incidence and mortality. As such, recent efforts have focused on developing novel colonoscopy devices and technologies to improve ADR.

AREAS COVERED

The main objective of this paper is to provide an overview of advancements in the fields of colonoscopy mechanical attachments, artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy, and colonoscopy optical enhancements with respect to ADR. We accomplished this by performing a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases from inception to September 2023. This review is intended to be an introduction to colonoscopy devices and technologies.

EXPERT OPINION

Numerous mechanical attachments and optical enhancements have been developed that have the potential to improve ADR and AI has gone from being an inaccessible concept to a feasible means for improving ADR. While these advances are exciting and portend a change in what will be considered standard colonoscopy, they continue to require refinement. Future studies should focus on combining modalities to further improve ADR and exploring the use of these technologies in other facets of colonoscopy.

Linked-Color Imaging Detects More Colorectal Adenoma and Serrated Lesions: An International Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Effects of linked-color imaging (LCI) on colorectal lesion detection and colonoscopy quality remain controversial. This study compared the detection rates of adenoma and other precursor lesions using LCI vs white-light imaging (WLI) during screening, diagnostic, and surveillance colonoscopies.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial was performed at 11 institutions in 4 Asian countries/regions. Patients with abdominal symptoms, a primary screening colonoscopy, positive fecal immunochemical test results, or undergoing postpolypectomy surveillance were recruited and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the LCI or high-definition WLI group. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate, advanced ADR, sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection rate, and the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy. The recommended surveillance schedule distribution after trial colonoscopy was analyzed.

RESULTS

Between November 2020 and January 2022, there were 3050 participants (LCI, n = 1527; WLI, n = 1523) recruited. The LCI group ADR was significantly higher than the WLI group ADR using intention-to-treat (58.7% vs 46.7%; P < .01) and per-protocol analyses (59.6% vs 46.4%; P < .01). The LCI group polyp detection rates (68.6% vs 59.5%; P < .01), SSL detection rates (4.8% vs 2.8%; P < .01), and adenomas per colonoscopy (1.48 vs 1.02; P < .01) also were significantly higher. However, the advanced ADR was not significantly different (13.2% vs 11.0%; P = .06). Significantly more patients in the LCI group had shorter recommended surveillance schedules than the WLI group (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with WLI, LCI improved adenoma and other polyp detection rates, including SSLs, resulting in alteration of the recommended surveillance schedule after screening, diagnostic, and postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000042432 (https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm).

Colorectal sessile serrated lesion detection using linked-color imaging versus narrow-band imaging: a parallel randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

 Previous studies have reported the effectiveness of narrow-band imaging (NBI) and linked-color imaging (LCI) in improving the detection of colorectal neoplasms. There has however been no direct comparison between LCI and NBI in the detection of colorectal sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of LCI and NBI in detecting colorectal SSLs.

METHODS

 A prospective, parallel, randomized controlled trial was conducted. The participants were randomly assigned to the LCI or NBI arms. The primary end point was the SSL detection rate (SDR).

RESULTS

 406 patients were involved; 204 in the LCI arm and 202 in the NBI arm. The total polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and SDR were 54.2 %, 38.7 %, and 10.8%, respectively. The SDR was not significantly different between the LCI and NBI arms (12.3 % vs. 9.4 %; P = 0.36). The differences in the detection rate and the per-patient number of polyps, adenomas, diminutive lesions, and flat lesions between LCI and NBI also were not statistically significant. Multivariate analysis showed that LCI and NBI were not independent factors associated with SDR, whereas Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score (odds ratio [OR] 1.35, 95 %CI 1.03-1.76; P = 0.03), withdrawal time (OR 1.13, 95 %CI 1.00-1.26; P = 0.04), and operator experience (OR 3.73, 95 %CI 1.67-8.32; P = 0.001) were independent factors associated with SDR.

CONCLUSIONS

 LCI and NBI are comparable for SSL detection, as well as for the detection of polyps and adenomas.

Colorectal Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Using Linked Color Imaging: A Multicenter, Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Linked color imaging (LCI) is a novel technology that improves the color differences between colorectal lesions and the surrounding mucosa. The present study aims to compare the detection of colorectal sessile serrated lesions (SSL) using LCI with white light imaging (WLI).

METHOD

A large-scale, multicenter, parallel prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in 4 hospitals in China. The participants were randomly assigned to the LCI group and WLI group. The primary endpoint was the SSL detection rate (SDR).

RESULTS

A total of 884 patients were involved in the intention-to-treat analysis, with 441 patients in the LCI group and 443 patients in the WLI group. The total polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and SDR were 51.8%, 35.7%, and 8.6%, respectively. The SDR was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (11.3% vs 5.9%, P = .004). Furthermore, LCI significantly increased the number of polyps and adenomas detected per patient, when compared with WLI (P < .05). In addition, there was higher detection rate of diminutive and flat lesions in the LCI group (P < .05). Multivariate analysis revealed that LCI is an independent factor associated with SDR (hazard ratio, 1.990; 95% confidence interval, 1.203-3.293; P = .007), along with withdrawal time (hazard ratio, 1.157; 95% confidence interval, 1.060-1.263; P = .001) and operator experience (hazard ratio, 1.850; 95% confidence interval, 1.045-3.273; P = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

LCI is significantly superior to WLI for SSL detection, and may improve polyp and adenoma detection. LCI can be recommended as an appropriate method for routine inspection during colonoscopy (http://www.chictr.org.cn number, ChiCTR2000035705).

Variability in adenoma detection rate in control groups of randomized colonoscopy trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is still the main surrogate outcome parameter of screening colonoscopy, but most studies include mixed indications, and basic ADR is quite variable. We therefore looked at the control groups in randomized ADR trials using advanced imaging or mechanical methods to find out whether indications or other factors influence ADR levels.

METHODS

Patients in the control groups of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ADR increase using various methods were collected based on a systematic review; this control group had to use high-definition white-light endoscopy performed between 2008 and 2021. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool ADR in control groups and its 95% confidence interval (CI) according to clinical (indication and demographic), study setting (tandem/parallel, number of centers, sample size), and technical (type of intervention, withdrawal time) parameters. Interstudy heterogeneity was reported with the I² statistic. Multivariable mixed-effects meta-regression was performed for potentially relevant variables.

RESULTS

From 80 studies, 25,304 patients in the respective control groups were included. ADR in control arms varied between 8.2% and 68.1% with a high degree of heterogeneity (I² = 95.1%; random-effect pooled value, 37.5%; 95% CI, 34.6‒40.5). There was no difference in ADR levels between primary colonoscopy screening (12 RCTs, 15%) and mixed indications including screening/surveillance and diagnostic colonoscopy; however, fecal immunochemical testing as an indication for colonoscopy was an independent predictor of ADR (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4). Other well-known parameters were confirmed by our analysis such as age (OR, 1.038; 95% CI, 1.004-1.074), sex (male sex: OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), and withdrawal time (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1). The type of intervention (imaging vs mechanical) had no influence, but methodologic factors did: More recent year of publication and smaller sample size were associated with higher ADR.

CONCLUSIONS

A high level of variability was found in the level of ADR in the control groups of RCTs. With regards to indications, only fecal immunochemical test-based colonoscopy studies influenced basic ADR, and primary colonoscopy screening appeared to be similar to other indications. Standardization for variables related to clinical, methodologic, and technical parameters is required to achieve generalizability and reproducibility.

Mucosal imaging in colon polyps: New advances and what the future may hold

An expanding range of advanced mucosal imaging technologies have been developed with the goal of improving the detection and characterization of lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. Many technologies have targeted colorectal neoplasia given the potential for intervention prior to the development of invasive cancer in the setting of widespread surveillance programs. Improvement in adenoma detection reduces miss rates and prevents interval cancer development. Advanced imaging technologies aim to enhance detection without significantly increasing procedural time. Accurate polyp characterisation guides resection techniques for larger polyps, as well as providing the platform for the “resect and discard” and “do not resect” strategies for small and diminutive polyps. This review aims to collate and summarise the evidence regarding these technologies to guide colonoscopic practice in both interventional and non-interventional endoscopists.

Detection of colorectal adenomas with texture and color enhancement imaging: Multicenter observational study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI), which allows the acquisition of brighter images with enhanced color and surface structure in colorectal polyp detection compared to white light imaging.

METHODS

Patients who underwent colonoscopy with repeated ascending colon observation using TXI and white light imaging between August 2020 and January 2021 were identified in three institutions. The outcomes included the mean number of adenomas detected per procedure (MAP), adenoma detection rate (ADR), and ascending colonic adenoma miss rate (Ac-AMR). Logistic regression was used to determine the effects of the variables on the outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 1043 lesions from 470 patients in the analysis. The MAP, ADR, flat polyp detection rate, and Ac-AMR in TXI and white light imaging were 1.5% (95% confidence interval 1.3-1.6%) vs. 1.0% (0.9-1.1%), 58.2% (51.7-64.6%) vs. 46.8% (40.2-53.4%), 66.2% (59.8-72.2%) vs. 49.8% (43.2-56.4%), and 17.9% (12.1-25.2%) vs. 28.2% (20.0-37.6%), respectively. TXI, age, withdrawal time, and endoscopy type were identified as significant factors affecting the MAP and the ADR using multivariate regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that TXI improve the detection of colorectal neoplastic lesions. However, prospective randomized trials are required to confirm these findings.

Linked color imaging improves visibility of colorectal serrated lesion by high color contrast to surrounding mucosa

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to objectively evaluate the efficacy of linked color imaging (LCI) in diagnosing colorectal serrated lesions by utilizing visibility scores and color differences.

METHODS

We examined 89 serrated lesions, including 36 hyperplastic polyps (HPs), 47 sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), and six traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs). Visibility changes were scored by six endoscopists as follows: 4, excellent; 3, good; 2, fair; and 1, poor. Furthermore, images obtained by white-light imaging (WLI) or LCI were assessed using the CIELAB color space in the lesion and adjacent mucosa. We calculated the mean color values (L*, a*, and b*) measured at five regions of interest of the sample lesion and surrounding mucosa and derived the color difference (ΔE*).

RESULTS

The visibility scores of both HPs and SSLs in LCI were significantly higher than that in WLI (HPs, 3.67/2.89, P < 0.001; SSLs, 3.07/2.36, P < 0.001). Furthermore, SSLs showed a significantly higher L* value and significantly lower a* and b* values in LCI than the adjacent mucosae (L*, 61.76/58.23, P = 0.016; a*, 14.91/17.58, P = 0.019; b*, 20.42/24.21, P = 0.007), while WLI produced no significant difference in any color value. A similar trend was apparent in HPs. In all serrated groups, LCI revealed significantly greater ΔE* values between the lesion and adjacent mucosa than WLI (HPs, 11.54/6.12; SSLs, 13.43/7.67; TSAs, 35.00/22.48).

CONCLUSION

Linked color imaging showed higher color contrast between serrated lesions and the surrounding mucosae compared with WLI, indicating improved visibility of colorectal serrated lesion using LCI.

Images of laser and light-emitting diode colonoscopy for comparing large colorectal lesion visibility with linked color imaging and white-light imaging

OBJECTIVES

In light-emitting diode (LED) and laser colonoscopy, linked color imaging (LCI) superiority to white-light imaging (WLI) for polyp detection is shown separately. We analyzed the noninferiority of LCI between LED and laser colonoscopy and that of WLI (LECOL study).

METHODS

We prospectively collected nonpolypoid lesions with WLI and LCI using LED and laser colonoscopy from January 2021 to August 2021. All images were evaluated randomly by 12 endoscopists (six nonexperts and six experts in three institutions) using the polyp visibility score: 4, excellent; 3, good; 2, fair; and 1, poor. The comparison score (LED better/similar/laser better) for redness and brightness was evaluated for WLI and LCI pictures of each lesion.

RESULTS

Finally, 63 nonpolypoid lesions were evaluated, and the mean polyp size was 24.5 ± 13.4 mm. Histopathology revealed 13 serrated lesions and 50 adenomatous/cancerous lesions. The mean polyp visibility scores of LCI pictures were significantly higher than those of WLI in the LED (3.35 ± 0.85 vs. 3.08 ± 0.91, P < 0.001) and the laser (3.40 ± 1.71 vs. 3.05 ± 0.97, P < 0.001) group, and the noninferiority of LCI pictures between LED and laser was significant (P < 0.001). The comparison scores revealed that the evaluation of redness and brightness (LED better/similar/laser better) were 26.8%/40.1%/33.1% and 43.5%/43.5%/13.0% for LCI pictures (P < 0.001) and 20.6%/44.3%/35.1% and 60.3%/31.7%/8.0% for WLI pictures (P < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The noninferiority of polyp visibility with WLI and LCI in LED and laser colonoscopy was shown. WLI and LCI of LED tended to be brighter and less reddish than those of laser.

Key factors for improving adenoma detection rate

INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy is a fundamental tool in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. Nevertheless, one-fourth of colorectal neoplasms are still missed during colonoscopy, potentially being the main reason for post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is currently known as the best quality indicator correlating with PCCRC incidence.

AREAS COVERED

We performed a literature review in order to summarize evidences investigating key factors affecting ADR: endoscopists education and training, patient management, endoscopic techniques, improved navigation (exposition defect), and enhanced lesions recognition (vision defect) were considered.

EXPERT OPINION

'Traditional' factors, such as split dose bowel preparation, adequate withdrawal time, and right colon second view, held a significant impact on ADR. Several devices and technologies have been developed to promote high-quality colonoscopy, however artificial intelligence may be considered the most promising tool for ADR improvement, provided that endoscopists education and recording are guaranteed.

Effect of Linked-color Imaging on the Detection of Adenomas in Screening Colonoscopies

OBJECTIVES

Linked-color imaging (LCI) is a new image-enhancement option that emphasizes mucosal surface contrast, facilitating the differentiation between colorectal lesions and normal mucosa. This study aimed to evaluate the potential of LCI to increase the detection of colorectal adenomas in screening colonoscopies.

METHODS

A prospective randomized study was conducted using white-light imaging (WLI), blue-laser imaging (BLI)-bright and LCI. The outcome measures were adenoma detection rate (ADR), mean number of adenomas per patient, and withdrawal time. Lesion characteristics such as size, morphology, location, and histology were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients were randomized, and 251 adenomas were detected. The overall ADR was 62%. The ADR was 52.9% for WLI, 62.1% for BLI-bright, and 71% for LCI, and was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (P=0.04). No significant difference was observed between LCI and BLI-bright (P=0.28) or BLI-bright and WLI (P=0.30). The mean number of adenomas per patient was 1.01, 1.03, and 1.62 for WLI, BLI-bright, and LCI, respectively, with a significant difference (P=0.02). Withdrawal time did not differ among the groups. A total of 71 adenomas were detected by WLI, 68 by BLI-bright, and 112 by LCI. There was no difference in the size and morphology of the adenomas detected, nor in the diagnosis of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps.

CONCLUSION

LCI significantly increased the detection of adenomas in screening colonoscopies.

Two cases of colonic tumors observed by linked color imaging and texture and color enhancement imaging with the tablet-image comparison method

An endoscope system using 5‐color light‐emitting diodes (LEDs) (EVIS X1: CV‐1500, Olympus Co., Tokyo, Japan) was released worldwide in July 2020. In addition to the improvement of narrow band imaging (NBI), this system enables texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI). TXI makes the lesion reddish and supports better visibility of colorectal lesions in comparison to white light imaging for improving lesion detection. On the other hand, another 4‐color LED endoscope system (ELUXEO: BL‐7000; Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) has been on the market in the West since 2017. This system enables blue light imaging (BLI) and linked color imaging (LCI). Generally, the accurate comparison between two images obtained by two different endoscope systems is difficult. To resolve this problem, we developed a method named the tablet‐image comparison (TIC) method. TIC is a simple, easy, and paperless method to get images under similar conditions of two endoscope systems for an accurate comparison. We herein report two colorectal lesions in which accurate comparisons of images between TXI and LCI and between improved NBI and BLI obtained in the EVIS X1 and ELUXEO systems were performed using the TIC method. One was IIa 30 mm (high‐grade dysplasia) and the other was IIa 25 mm (low‐grade adenoma). A detailed comparison between TXI and LCI could be performed by TIC. In these two cases, with a distant view, TXI showed greater redness than LCI. LCI showed slightly higher brightness than TXI. In magnified TXI and LCI, the irregularities observed were similar to NBI and BLI, respectively.

Linked Colour imaging for the detection of polyps in patients with Lynch syndrome: a multicentre, parallel randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Despite regular colonoscopy surveillance, colorectal cancers still occur in patients with Lynch syndrome. Thus, detection of all relevant precancerous lesions remains very important. The present study investigates Linked Colour imaging (LCI), an image-enhancing technique, as compared with high-definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) for the detection of polyps in this patient group.

DESIGN

This prospective, randomised controlled trial was performed by 22 experienced endoscopists from eight centres in six countries. Consecutive Lynch syndrome patients ≥18 years undergoing surveillance colonoscopy were randomised (1:1) and stratified by centre for inspection with either LCI or HD-WLE. Primary outcome was the polyp detection rate (PDR).

RESULTS

Between January 2018 and March 2020, 357 patients were randomised and 332 patients analysed (160 LCI, 172 HD-WLE; 6 excluded due to incomplete colonoscopies and 19 due to insufficient bowel cleanliness). No significant difference was observed in PDR with LCI (44.4%; 95% CI 36.5% to 52.4%) compared with HD-WLE (36.0%; 95% CI 28.9% to 43.7%) (p=0.12). Of the secondary outcome parameters, more adenomas were found on a patient (adenoma detection rate 36.3%; vs 25.6%; p=0.04) and a colonoscopy basis (mean adenomas per colonoscopy 0.65 vs 0.42; p=0.04). The median withdrawal time was not statistically different between LCI and HD-WLE (12 vs 11 min; p=0.16).

CONCLUSION

LCI did not improve the PDR compared with HD-WLE in patients with Lynch syndrome undergoing surveillance. The relevance of findings more adenomas by LCI has to be examined further.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03344289.

Can image-enhanced endoscopy improve adenoma detection rate?

An accumulating body of evidence has shown that detection and resection of pre-cancerous adenoma by colonoscopy could effectively prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) and its related mortality. Among various colonoscopy quality indicators, such as cecal intubation rate, withdrawal time, and adenoma detection rate (ADR); ADR is the most important and most closely associated with the subsequent risk of CRC. Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE), including digital and dye-based IEE, was originally developed to discriminate neoplastic from non-neoplastic lesions but later studies have demonstrated that it can also enhance lesion detection by enhancing the contrast between the lesion and background colonic mucosa. Nevertheless, using IEE in colonoscopy for lesion detection is still not the standard way of practice in the real world. For a better understanding of current IEE modalities, this review introduces and compares the currently available IEE modalities and their efficacy in detecting adenoma from the results of randomized controlled trials or meta-analyses.

TXI (Texture and Color Enhancement Imaging) for Serrated Colorectal Lesions

Background and aim: Olympus Corporation released the texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI) technology as a novel image-enhancing endoscopic technique. We investigated the effectiveness of TXI in the imaging of serrated colorectal polyps, including sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). Methods: Serrated colorectal polyps were observed using white light imaging (WLI), TXI, narrow-band imaging (NBI), and chromoendoscopy with and without magnification. Serrated polyps were histologically confirmed. TXI was compared with WLI, NBI, and chromoendoscopy for the visibility of the lesions without magnification and for that of the vessel and surface patterns with magnification. Three expert endoscopists evaluated the visibility scores, which were classified from 1 to 4. Results: Twenty-nine consecutive serrated polyps were evaluated. In the visibility score without magnification, TXI was significantly superior to WLI but inferior to chromoendoscopy in the imaging of serrated polyps and the sub-analysis of SSLs. In the visibility score for vessel patterns with magnification, TXI was significantly superior to WLI and chromoendoscopy in the imaging of serrated polyps and the sub-analysis of SSLs. In the visibility score for surface patterns with magnification, TXI was significantly superior to WLI but inferior to NBI in serrated polyps and in the sub-analysis of SSLs and hyperplastic polyps. Conclusions: TXI provided higher visibility than did WLI for serrated, colorectal polyps, including SSLs.

THE IMPACT OF COLORECTAL CHROMENDOSCOPY WITH ENHANCED MUCOSAL IMAGING ON ADENOMA MISS RATE IN SCREENING COLONOSCOPY

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis and treatment of adenomas. It is related with decreased colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, an important problem is missed colorectal adenoma. All efforts should be undertaken to reduce this rate. Enhancing imaging technologies including electronic chromoendoscopy and magnification has been increasingly adopted for improving the colorectal neoplasia detection rate and the detailed study of its surface, as well. I-scan images (Pentax, Tokyo, Japan) provides virtual chromoendoscopy in real-time during the examination to view the surface pattern, highlighting the microvasculature of the neoplastic lesion. The evidence on the impact of the use of I-scan on the colorectal adenoma detection rate is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the use of I-scan has impact on the adenoma miss rate (AMR) of screening colonoscopy exams.

METHODS

Observational and prospective study conducted by monitoring patients over 50 years undergoing colonoscopy. There were two groups: Group 1 - first inspection with standard high-definition white-light (HDWL) followed by a second inspection with I-scan 1; Group 2 - first inspection with I-scan 1 followed by a second inspection with standard HDWL. The primary outcome was the AMR from the first exam, calculated with the number of adenomas detected in the second exam, divided by the total number of adenomas detected in both exams.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients participated in the study. 14 were excluded, with a final sample of 71 patients, in the Group 1, 34 patients, and the Group 2, 37. A total of 58 adenomas were detected, 40 in the first inspection (20 in each group) and 18 in the second inspection in group 1. The overall AMR was higher for the Group 1 than the Group 2 (47.4% vs 0% P=0.0002).

CONCLUSION

The use of I-scan 1 during colonoscopy exam reduces the AMR.

Enhancing polyp detection: technological advances in colonoscopy imaging

The detection and removal of polyps at colonoscopy is core to the current colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention strategy. However, colonoscopy is flawed with a well described miss rate and variability in detection rates associated with incomplete protection from CRC. Consequently, there is significant interest in techniques and technologies which increase polyp detection with the aim to remedy colonoscopy's ills. Technologic advances in colonoscope imaging are numerous and include; increased definition of imaging, widening field of view, virtual technologies to supplant conventional chromocolonoscopy (CC) and now computer assisted detection. However, despite nearly two decades of technologic advances, data on gains in detection from individual technologies have been modest at best and heterogenous and conflicted as a rule. This state of detection technology science is exacerbated by use of relatively blunt metrics of improvement without consensus, the myopic search for gains over single generations of technology improvement and an unhealthy focus on adenomatous lesions. Yet there remains cause for optimism as detection gains from new technology, while small, may still improve CRC prevention. The technologies are also readily available in current generation colonoscopes and have roles beyond simply detection such as lesion characterization, further improving their worth. Coupled with the imminent expansion of computer assisted detection the detection future from colonoscope imaging advances looks bright. This review aims to cover the major imaging advances and evidence for improvement in polyp detection.

Linked color imaging, mucosal exposure device, their combination, and standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

By different mechanisms, image-enhancement techniques (linked color imaging [LCI]) and mucosal exposure devices (Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy [EAC]) can improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR) during screening colonoscopy. The impact of the combination of the 2 techniques has never been studied. This study aimed to compare the ADR between the combination of LCI and EAC (LCI+EAC), LCI alone, EAC alone, and standard high-definition (HD) colonoscopy.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial included participants who underwent screening colonoscopy. Participants were randomized to LCI+EAC, LCI, EAC, and standard HD colonoscopy. All colonoscopies were performed by endoscopists with a recorded ADR ≥35%. The primary outcome was the ADR. Secondary outcomes were proximal ADR (pADR) and the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APC).

RESULTS

One thousand participants were included in the study. The LCI+EAC group provided the highest ADR and pADR. The ADRs in the LCI+EAC, LCI, EAC, and standard HD colonoscopy groups were 57.2%, 52.8%, 51.6%, and 47.6%, respectively, with pADRs of 38.4%, 34.8%, 33.6%, and 28.0%, respectively. The mean numbers of APC were 1.28, 1.20, 1.16, and .89, respectively. After a multiple comparison adjustment, a significant difference in pADR was only observed between the LCI+EAC and standard HD colonoscopy groups (difference, 10.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, .02%-17.4%; P = .05). The incidence rate ratios of the adenoma numbers were significantly higher in the LCI+EAC (1.43), LCI (1.34), and EAC (1.30) groups relative to the standard HD colonoscopy group (.89) (P < .009 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of LCI and EAC can significantly improve the detection of pADR and APC but not ADR by high-ADR performers. (Clinical trial registration number: TCTR20190319001.).

An analysis about the function of a new artificial intelligence, CAD EYE with the lesion recognition and diagnosis for colorectal polyps in clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

Recently, CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan), an artificial intelligence for the lesion recognition (CADe) and the optical diagnosis (CADx) of colorectal polyps, was released. We evaluated the function of CADe and CADx of CAD EYE.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective study, we examined consecutive polyps ≤ 10 mm detected from March to April 2021 to determine whether CAD EYE could recognize them live with both normal- and high-speed observation using white-light imaging (WLI) and linked-color imaging (LCI). We then examined whether the polyps were neoplastic or hyperplastic live with magnified or non-magnified blue-laser imaging (BLI-LASER) or blue-light imaging (BLI-LED) under CAD EYE, comparing the retrospective evaluations with 5 experts and 5 trainees using still images. All polyps were histopathologically examined.

RESULTS

We analyzed 100 polyps (mean size 3.9 ± 2.6 mm; 55 neoplastic and 45 hyperplastic lesions) in 25 patients. Regarding CADe, the respective detection rates of CAD EYE with normal- and high-speed observation were 85.0% and 67.0% for WLI (p = 0.002) and 89.0% and 75.0% for LCI (p = 0.009). Regarding CADx for differentiating neoplastic and hyperplastic lesions, the diagnostic accuracy values of CAD EYE with non-magnified and magnified BLI-LASER/LED were 88.8% and 87.8%. Regarding magnified BLI-LASER/LED, the diagnostic accuracy value of CAD EYE was not significantly different from that of experts (92.0%, p = 0.17), but that of trainees (79.0%, p = 0.04). We also found no significant differences in CADe or CADx between LED (53 lesions) and LASER (47 lesions).

CONCLUSIONS

CAD EYE was a helpful tool for CADe and CADx in clinical practice.

Linked color imaging versus white light imaging colonoscopy for colorectal adenoma detection: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The adenoma detection rate is an important indicator of colonoscopy quality and colorectal cancer incidence. We compared the adenoma detection rates between white light imaging (WLI) and linked color imaging (LCI) colonoscopy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing colonoscopy for positive fecal immunochemical tests, follow-up of colon polyps, and abdominal symptoms at three institutions were randomly assigned to the LCI or WLI groups. Mean adenoma number per patient (including based on endoscopists' experience), adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, mean adenoma number per location, and adenoma size were compared.

RESULTS

The LCI and WLI groups comprised 494 and 501 patients, respectively. No significant differences in the cecal intubation rate (LCI vs WLI: 99.5% vs 99.4%), cecal intubation time, and withdrawal time were noted between groups. The mean adenoma number per patient was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (1.07 vs 0.88, P = 0.04), particularly in the descending [0.12 (58/494) vs 0.07 (35/501), P = 0.01] and sigmoid colon [0.41 (201/494) vs 0.30 (149/501), P ≤ 0.001]. However, the adenoma detection rate was 47.1% in the LCI group and 46.9% in the WLI group, with no significant difference (P = 0.93). The total number of sessile-type adenomas was significantly higher in the LCI group than in the WLI group (346/494 vs 278/501, P = 0.04). As for polyp size, small polyps (≤ 5 mm) were detected at a significantly higher rate in the LCI group (271/494 vs 336/501, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Linked color imaging is significantly superior to WLI in terms of mean adenoma number per patient.

Computer-aided detection versus advanced imaging for detection of colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Computer-aided detection (CADe) techniques based on artificial intelligence algorithms can assist endoscopists in detecting colorectal neoplasia. CADe has been associated with an increased adenoma detection rate, a key quality indicator, but the utility of CADe compared with existing advanced imaging techniques and distal attachment devices is unclear.

METHODS

For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we did a comprehensive search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases from inception to Nov 30, 2020, for randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of the following endoscopic techniques in detecting colorectal neoplasia: CADe, high definition (HD) white-light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, or add-on devices (ie, systems that increase mucosal visualisation, such as full spectrum endoscopy [FUSE] or G-EYE balloon endoscopy). We collected data on adenoma detection rates, sessile serrated lesion detection rates, the proportion of large adenomas detected per colonoscopy, and withdrawal times. A frequentist framework, random-effects network meta-analysis was done to compare artificial intelligence with chromoendoscopy, increased mucosal visualisation systems, and HD white-light endoscopy (the control group). We estimated odds ratios (ORs) for the adenoma detection rate, sessile serrated lesion detection rate, and proportion of large adenomas detected per colonoscopy, and calculated mean differences for withdrawal time, with 95% CIs. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

FINDINGS

50 randomised controlled trials, comprising 34 445 participants, were included in our main analysis (six trials of CADe, 18 of chromoendoscopy, and 26 of increased mucosal visualisation systems). HD white-light endoscopy was the control technique in all 50 studies. Compared with the control technique, the adenoma detection rate was 7·4% higher with CADe (OR 1·78 [95% CI 1·44-2·18]), 4·4% higher with chromoendoscopy (1·22 [1·08-1·39]), and 4·1% higher with increased mucosal visualisation systems (1·16 [1·04-1·28]). CADe ranked as the superior technique for adenoma detection (with moderate confidence in hierarchical ranking); cross-comparisons of CADe with other imaging techniques showed a significant increase in the adenoma detection rate with CADe versus increased mucosal visualisation systems (OR 1·54 [95% CI 1·22-1·94]; low certainty of evidence) and with CADe versus chromoendoscopy (1·45 [1·14-1·85]; moderate certainty of evidence). When focusing on large adenomas (≥10 mm) there was a significant increase in the detection of large adenomas only with CADe (OR 1·69 [95% CI 1·10-2·60], moderate certainty of evidence) when compared to HD white-light endoscopy; CADe ranked as the superior strategy for detection of large adenomas. CADe also seemed to be the superior strategy for detection of sessile serrated lesions (with moderate confidence in hierarchical ranking), although no significant increase in the sessile serrated lesion detection rate was shown (OR 1·37 [95% CI 0·65-2·88]). No significant difference in withdrawal time was reported for CADe compared with the other techniques.

INTERPRETATION

Based on the published literature, detection rates of colorectal neoplasia are higher with CADe than with other techniques such as chromoendoscopy or tools that increase mucosal visualisation, supporting wider incorporation of CADe strategies into community endoscopy services.

FUNDING

None.

Detection of Colorectal Neoplasms Using Linked Color Imaging: A Prospective, Randomized, Tandem Colonoscopy Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been shown to be related to a lower incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. We analyzed the efficacy of linked color imaging (LCI) by assessing the detection, miss, and visibility of various featured adenomas as compared with white light imaging (WLI).

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, tandem trial. The participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups: first observation by LCI, then second observation by WLI (LCI group); or both observations by WLI (WLI group). Suspected neoplastic lesions were resected after magnifying image-enhanced endoscopy. The primary outcome was to compare the ADR during the first observation. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of adenoma miss rate (AMR) and visibility score.

RESULTS

A total of 780 patients were randomized, 700 of whom were included in the final analysis. The ADR was 69.6% and 63.2% in the LCI and WLI groups, respectively, with no significant difference. However, LCI improved the average ADR in low-detectors compared with high-detectors (76.0% vs 55.1%; P < .001). Total AMR was 20.6% in the LCI group, which was significantly lower than that in the WLI group (31.1%) (P < .001). AMR in the LCI group was significantly lower, especially for diminutive adenomas (23.4% vs 35.1%; P < .001) and nonpolypoid lesions (25.6% vs 37.9%; P < .001) compared with the WLI group.

CONCLUSION

Although both methods provided a similar ADR, LCI had a lower AMR than WLI. LCI could benefit endoscopists with lower ADR, an observation that warrants additional study. (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, Number: UMIN000026359).

Linked colour imaging versus white-light colonoscopy for the detection of flat colorectal lesions: A randomized controlled trial

AIM

Linked colour imaging is an image-enhanced endoscopy system that emphasizes the red portion of the mucosa's colour. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of linked colour imaging with white-light colonoscopy for the detection of flat-type colorectal polyps.

METHOD

This was a single-centre, randomized controlled trial. Enrolled patients were those aged ≥50 years undergoing cap-assisted colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. They were randomized in a 1:1 ratio for observation using linked colour imaging or white-light colonoscopy. All colorectal polyps detected were removed or biopsied. The primary outcome was the number of flat-type polyps per patient in patients in whom flat polyps were detected. Secondary outcomes included adenoma and polyp detection rates.

RESULTS

There were 302 subjects randomized: 152 to linked colour imaging and 150 to white-light colonoscopy. There were no differences in the clinical features between the two arms. The number of flat polyps detected per patient using linked colour imaging was approximately twice that with white light (2.9 ± 3.0 vs 1.2 ± 1.6, p = 0.045). Linked colour imaging also proved superior to white-light colonoscopy in terms of adenoma and polyp detection rates [adenomas 66% (101/152) vs 49% (73/150), p = 0.0024; polyps 69% (105/152) vs 55% (82/150), p = 0.013]. The ratio of polyps detected in the right colon compared with those detected in the left colon was significantly greater using linked colour than white-light imaging (168/64 vs 93/84; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with white-light colonoscopy, linked colour imaging improved adenoma and polyp detection rates, including detection of flat-type colorectal polyps.

Colon polyp detection using linked color imaging compared to white light imaging: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Linked color imaging (LCI) is a novel image-enhancing technology which enhances color differences between a colorectal lesion and surrounding mucosa with enough brightness to illuminate the wide colorectal lumen. The aim of this study is to compare colorectal polyp detection using LCI with that using white light imaging (WLI).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials and prospective studies comparing LCI with WLI for colorectal polyp detection were selected. Outcomes included overall polyp/adenoma detection and additional polyp detection at a second observation. Outcomes were documented by pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel random effect model.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. LCI showed significant superiority for polyp and adenoma detection compared with WLI (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09-1.25, P < 0.001 for polyp detection; RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.14-1.39 P < 0.001 for adenoma detection). LCI significantly increased the number of polyps detected per patient compared with WLI (mean difference 0.27, 95% CI 0.01-0.53, P = 0.040). LCI significantly increased the number of adenomas detected per patient compared with WLI (mean difference 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.36, P = 0.002). LCI significantly increased the number of flat polyps detected per patient compared with WLI (mean difference 0.14, 95% CI 0.01-0.27, P = 0.040). LCI had a significantly higher rate of additional polyp detection compared with WLI in the right colon (RR 2.68, 95% CI 1.71-4.19, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Linked color imaging has significantly greater polyp and adenoma detection rates and detection rate of previously missed polyps compared with WLI. We recommend the initial use of LCI for routine colonoscopy.

Linked-color imaging versus white-light colonoscopy in an organized colorectal cancer screening program

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Linked-color imaging (LCI), a new image-enhancing technology emphasizing contrast in mucosal color, has been demonstrated to substantially reduce polyp miss rate as compared with standard white-light imaging (WLI) in tandem colonoscopy studies. Whether LCI increases adenoma detection rate (ADR) remains unclear.

METHODS

Consecutive subjects undergoing screening colonoscopy after fecal immunochemical test (FIT) positivity were 1:1 randomized to undergo colonoscopy with LCI or WLI, both in high-definition systems. Insertion and withdrawal phases of each colonoscopy were carried out using the same assigned light. Experienced endoscopists from 7 Italian centers participated in the study. Randomization was stratified by gender, age, and screening round. The primary outcome measure was represented by ADR.

RESULTS

Of 704 eligible subjects, 649 were included (48.9% men, mean age ± standard deviation, 60.8 ± 7.3 years) and randomized to LCI (n = 326) or WLI (n = 323) colonoscopy. The ADR was higher in the LCI group (51.8%) than in the WLI group (43.7%) (relative risk, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.40). The proportions of patients with advanced adenomas and sessile serrated lesions were, respectively, 21.2% and 8.6% in the LCI arm and 18.9% and 5.9% in the WLI arm (not significant for both comparisons). At multivariate analysis, LCI was independently associated with ADR, along with male gender, increasing age, and adequate (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score ≥6) bowel preparation. At per-polyp analysis, the mean ± standard deviation number of adenomas per colonoscopy was comparable in the LCI and WLI arms, whereas the corresponding figures for proximal adenomas was significantly higher in the LCI group (.72 ± 1.2 vs .55 ± 1.07, P = .05) CONCLUSIONS: In FIT-positive patients undergoing screening colonoscopy, the routine use of LCI significantly increased the ADR. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03690297.).

GIE Editorial Board top 10 topics: advances in GI endoscopy in 2019

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's GIE Editorial Board reviewed original endoscopy-related articles published during 2019 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other leading medical and gastroenterology journals. Votes from each individual member were tallied to identify a consensus list of 10 topic areas of major advances in GI endoscopy. Individual board members summarized important findings published in these 10 areas of disinfection, artificial intelligence, bariatric endoscopy, adenoma detection, polypectomy, novel imaging, Barrett's esophagus, third space endoscopy, interventional EUS, and training. This document summarizes these "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2019.

Comparison Between Linked Color Imaging and Blue Laser Imaging for Improving the Visibility of Flat Colorectal Polyps: A Multicenter Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Linked color imaging (LCI) and blue laser imaging-bright (BLI-b) improve the visibility of gastrointestinal lesions. In this multicenter study, we compared the effects of LCI and BLI-b on the visibility of flat polyps with visibility scores and color difference (CD) values, including fast-withdrawal and large-monitor observation.

METHODS

We recorded 120 videos of 40 consecutive flat polyps (2-20 mm), adenoma, and sessile serrated adenoma and polyp (SSA/P), using white light imaging (WLI), BLI-b, and LCI from July 2017 to December 2017. All videos were evaluated by eight endoscopists according to a published polyp visibility score of 4 (excellent) to 1 (poor). Additionally, 1.5 ×faster and 1.7 ×sized videos were evaluated. Moreover, we calculated the CD values for each polyp in three modes.

RESULTS

The mean LCI scores (3.1 ± 0.9) were significantly higher than the WLI scores (2.5 ± 1.0, p < 0.001) but not significantly higher than the BLI-b scores (3.0 ± 1.0). The scores of faster videos on LCI (3.0 ± 1.1) were significantly higher than WLI (2.0 ± 1.0, p < 0.001) and BLI-b (2.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.03). The scores of larger-sized videos on LCI were not significantly higher than those of WLI or BLI-b. The CD value of LCI (18.0 ± 7.7) was higher than that of WLI (11.7 ± 7.0, p < 0.001), but was not significantly higher than that of BLI-b (16.6 ± 9.6). The CD value of LCI was significantly higher than that of BLI-b for adenoma, but the CD value of BLI-b was significantly higher than that of LCI for SSA/P.

CONCLUSIONS

The superiority of LCI to BLI-b was proven for the visibility of adenoma and fast observation.

Blue-light imaging and linked-color imaging improve visualization of Barrett's neoplasia by nonexpert endoscopists

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic recognition of early Barrett's neoplasia is challenging. Blue-light imaging (BLI) and linked-color imaging (LCI) may assist endoscopists in appreciation of neoplasia. Our aim was to evaluate BLI and LCI for visualization of Barrett's neoplasia in comparison with white-light endoscopy (WLE) alone, when assessed by nonexpert endoscopists.

METHODS

In this web-based assessment, corresponding WLE, BLI, and LCI images of 30 neoplastic Barrett's lesions were delineated by 3 expert endoscopists to establish ground truth. These images were then scored and delineated by 76 nonexpert endoscopists from 3 countries and with different levels of expertise, in 4 separate assessment phases with a washout period of 2 weeks. Assessments were as follows: assessment 1, WLE only; assessment 2, WLE + BLI; assessment 3, WLE + LCI; assessment 4, WLE + BLI + LCI. The outcomes were (1) appreciation of macroscopic appearance and ability to delineate lesions (visual analog scale [VAS] scores); (2) preferred technique (ordinal scores); and (3) assessors' delineation performance in terms of overlap with expert ground truth.

RESULTS

Median VAS scores for phases 2 to 4 were significantly higher than in phase 1 (P < .001). Assessors preferred BLI and LCI over WLE for appreciation of macroscopic appearance (P < .001) and delineation (P < .001). Linear mixed-effect models showed that delineation performance increased significantly in phase 4.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of BLI and LCI has significant additional value for the visualization of Barrett's neoplasia when used by nonexpert endoscopists. Assessors appreciated the addition of BLI and LCI better than the use of WLE alone. Furthermore, this addition led to improved delineation performance, thereby allowing for better acquisition of targeted biopsy samples. (The Netherlands Trial Registry number: NL7541.).

The efficacy of tumor characterization and tumor detectability of linked color imaging and blue laser imaging with an LED endoscope compared to a LASER endoscope

OBJECTIVES

An endoscope with a light-emitting diode (LED) light source which has a 2-mm close-distance observation function without magnification, has been marketed, enabling linked color imaging (LCI) and blue laser imaging (BLI) for tumor detection and characterization. We analyzed the efficacy of a LED endoscope compared to a LASER endoscope.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 272 lesions observed using the LED endoscopic system (Fujifilm Co., Tokyo, Japan) from May 2018 to September 2019. The Japanese NBI Classification was used for tumor characterization. We analyzed the diagnostic accuracy and confidence level. Sixty-one lesions observed with both the LED and magnified LASER endoscopes were also analyzed to compare the diagnostic accuracy. Regarding the tumor detectability, we calculated color difference values (CDVs) and brightness values (BVs) of white-light imaging, BLI, and LCI modes between the two endoscopes for each tumor.

RESULTS

The mean polyp size was 9.2 ± 11.3 mm. Histology showed 71 sessile serrated lesions, 193 adenoma and high-grade dysplasias, and 8 T1 cancers. The diagnostic accuracy of tumors ≥ 10 and < 10 mm was 72.0% and 92.9% (p < 0.001), respectively and the high confidence rate was 93.8%. The diagnostic accuracy of LED (77.0%) was a little higher than that of LASER without magnification (65.6%, p = 0.16) but was not inferior to that of LASER with magnification (82.0%, p = 0.50). The respective CDVs of LED and LASER endoscopes were 20.6 ± 11.2 and 21.6 ± 11.2 for LCI (p = 0.30), and the respective BVs were 210.0 ± 24.2 and 175.9 ± 21.1 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A LED endoscope with close-distance observation improved tumor detection and characterization due to high brightness.

Significance of Linked Color Imaging for Predicting the Risk of Clinical Relapse in Ulcerative Colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease with unknown etiology. Recently, mucosal healing has emerged as an important therapeutic endpoint in UC. Linked color imaging (LCI) is a novel endoscopic system that enhances the color differences of the gastrointestinal mucosa. Our previous study emphasized the redness and yellowness of the lesion using LCI observation, which was useful for the evaluation of histological mucosal activity in UC. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation between LCI observation and clinical relapse rate in UC patients. We retrospectively analyzed UC patients who underwent total colonoscopy between August 2016 and October 2018 at our facility with Mayo endoscopic scores of 0 or 1. We assessed the correlation between orange-like color lesion (defined as LCI-scarlet color lesions) and clinical relapse rate (requiring additional treatment for UC) during the 1-year follow-up period. Fifty-eight patients (22 female, 36 male; median age at diagnosis, 47.2 (18–80) years) who underwent colonoscopy were analyzed. During the 1-year follow-up period, clinical relapse was observed in 12 patients (20.1%) among which ten patients (83.3%) had an LCI-scarlet color lesions recognized by LCI. By contrast, 29 patients (63%) had no LCI-scarlet color lesions in the clinical remission group (n = 46). There was a significant difference in LCI-scarlet color between the clinical relapse and remission groups, remaining significantly associated with clinical relapse. LCI findings, including an orange-like color lesion, have diagnostic implications for predicting the risk of clinical relapse in UC during the 1-year follow-up period.

Advanced Endoscopic Imaging in Colonic Neoplasia

Background

Endoscopic imaging is a rapidly evolving field with a constant influx of new concepts and technologies. Since the introduction of video endoscopy and subsequently high-definition imaging as the first revolutions in gastrointestinal endoscopy, several technologies of virtual chromoendoscopy have been developed and brought to the market in the past decade, which have shaped and revolutionized for a second time our approach to endoscopic imaging. In parallel to these developments, microscopic imaging technologies, such as endomicroscopy and endocytoscopy, allow us to examine single cells within the mucosa in real time, thereby enabling histological diagnoses during ongoing endoscopy.

Summary

In this review, we provide an overview on the technical background of different technologies of advanced endoscopic imaging, and then review and discuss their role and applications for the diagnosis and management of colorectal neoplasms as well as limitations and challenges that exist despite all technological improvements.

Key Messages

Technologies of advanced endoscopic imaging have profound impact not only on our imaging capabilities, they are also about to fundamentally change our approach to managing lesions in the gastrointestinal tract: not every lesion found during colonoscopy has to be excised or sent for histopathologic evaluation. However, before this becomes widespread reality, major obstacles such as patient acceptance, adoption by less trained endoscopists, and also legal aspects need to carefully addressed. The development of computer-aided diagnosis and artificial intelligence algorithms hold the potential to overcome the obstacles associated with the concept of optical biopsy and will most likely fundamentally facilitate, shape, and change decision making in the management of colorectal lesions.