Expected value of artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

Efficacy of real-time artificial intelligence-aid endoscopic ultrasonography diagnostic system in discriminating gastrointestinal stromal tumors and leiomyomas: a multicenter diagnostic study

Background

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) represent the most prevalent type of subepithelial lesions (SELs) with malignant potential. Current imaging tools struggle to differentiate GISTs from leiomyomas. This study aimed to create and assess a real-time artificial intelligence (AI) system using endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) images to differentiate between GISTs and leiomyomas.

Methods

The AI system underwent development and evaluation using EUS images from 5 endoscopic centers in China between January 2020 and August 2023. EUS images of 1101 participants with SELs were retrospectively collected for AI system development. A cohort of 241 participants with SELs was recruited for external AI system evaluation. Another cohort of 59 participants with SELs was prospectively enrolled to assess the real-time clinical application of the AI system. The AI system's performance was compared to that of endoscopists. This study is registered with Chictr.org.cn, Number ChiCT2000035787.

Findings

The AI system displayed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.948 (95% CI: 0.921-0.969) for discriminating GISTs and leiomyomas. The AI system's accuracy (ACC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) reached 91.7% (95% CI 87.5%-94.6%), 90.3% (95% CI 83.4%-94.5%), 93.0% (95% CI 87.2%-96.3%), 91.9% (95% CI 85.3%-95.7%), and 91.5% (95% CI 85.5%-95.2%), respectively. Moreover, the AI system exhibited excellent performance in diagnosing ≤20 mm SELs (ACC 93.5%, 95% CI 0.900-0.969). In a prospective real-time clinical application trial, the AI system achieved an AUC of 0.865 (95% CI 0.764-0.966) and 0.864 (95% CI 0.762-0.966) for GISTs and leiomyomas diagnosis, respectively, markedly surpassing endoscopists [AUC 0.698 (95% CI 0.562-0.834) for GISTs and AUC 0.695 (95% CI 0.546-0.825) for leiomyomas].

Interpretation

We successfully developed a real-time AI-assisted EUS diagnostic system. The incorporation of the real-time AI system during EUS examinations can assist endoscopists in rapidly and accurately differentiating various types of SELs in clinical practice, facilitating improved diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making.

Funding

Science and Technology Commission Foundation of Shanghai Municipality, Science and Technology Commission Foundation of the Xuhui District, the Interdisciplinary Program of Shanghai Jiao Tong University and the Research Funds of Shanghai Sixth people's Hospital.

Influence of artificial intelligence on the diagnostic performance of endoscopists in the assessment of Barrett's esophagus: a tandem randomized and video trial

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the effect of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support system on the performance and diagnostic confidence of endoscopists in their assessment of Barrett's esophagus (BE).

METHODS

96 standardized endoscopy videos were assessed by 22 endoscopists with varying degrees of BE experience from 12 centers. Assessment was randomized into two video sets: group A (review first without AI and second with AI) and group B (review first with AI and second without AI). Endoscopists were required to evaluate each video for the presence of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) and then decide on a spot for a targeted biopsy. After the second assessment, they were allowed to change their clinical decision and confidence level.

RESULTS

AI had a stand-alone sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.2%, 68.9%, and 81.3%, respectively. Without AI, BE experts had an overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.3%, 58.1%, and 71.5%, respectively. With AI, BE nonexperts showed a significant improvement in sensitivity and specificity when videos were assessed a second time with AI (sensitivity 69.8% [95%CI 65.2%-74.2%] to 78.0% [95%CI 74.0%-82.0%]; specificity 67.3% [95%CI 62.5%-72.2%] to 72.7% [95%CI 68.2%-77.3%]). In addition, the diagnostic confidence of BE nonexperts improved significantly with AI.

CONCLUSION

BE nonexperts benefitted significantly from additional AI. BE experts and nonexperts remained significantly below the stand-alone performance of AI, suggesting that there may be other factors influencing endoscopists' decisions to follow or discard AI advice.

AI-assisted capsule endoscopy reading in suspected small bowel bleeding: a multicentre prospective study

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.

Evaluating false-positive detection in a computer-aided detection system for colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Computer-aided detection (CADe) systems can efficiently detect polyps during colonoscopy. However, false-positive (FP) activation is a major limitation of CADe. We aimed to compare the rate and causes of FP using CADe before and after an update designed to reduce FP.

METHODS

We analyzed CADe-assisted colonoscopy videos recorded between July 2022 and October 2022. The number and causes of FPs and excessive time spent by the endoscopist on FP (ET) were compared pre- and post-update using 1:1 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

During the study period, 191 colonoscopy videos (94 and 97 in the pre- and post-update groups, respectively) were recorded. Propensity score matching resulted in 146 videos (73 in each group). The mean number of FPs and median ET per colonoscopy were significantly lower in the post-update group than those in the pre-update group (4.2 ± 3.7 vs 18.1 ± 11.1; P < 0.001 and 0 vs 16 s; P < 0.001, respectively). Mucosal tags, bubbles, and folds had the strongest association with decreased FP post-update (pre-update vs post-update: 4.3 ± 3.6 vs 0.4 ± 0.8, 0.32 ± 0.70 vs 0.04 ± 0.20, and 8.6 ± 6.7 vs 1.6 ± 1.7, respectively). There was no significant decrease in the true positive rate (post-update vs pre-update: 95.0% vs 99.2%; P = 0.09) or the adenoma detection rate (post-update vs pre-update: 52.1% vs 49.3%; P = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

The updated CADe can reduce FP without impairing polyp detection. A reduction in FP may help relieve the burden on endoscopists.

Deep Learning in High-Resolution Anoscopy: Assessing the Impact of Staining and Therapeutic Manipulation on Automated Detection of Anal Cancer Precursors

INTRODUCTION

High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is the gold standard for detecting anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) precursors. Preliminary studies on the application of artificial intelligence (AI) models to this modality have revealed promising results. However, the impact of staining techniques and anal manipulation on the effectiveness of these algorithms has not been evaluated. We aimed to develop a deep learning system for automatic differentiation of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion vs low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in HRA images in different subsets of patients (nonstained, acetic acid, lugol, and after manipulation).

METHODS

A convolutional neural network was developed to detect and differentiate high-grade and low-grade anal squamous intraepithelial lesions based on 27,770 images from 103 HRA examinations performed in 88 patients. Subanalyses were performed to evaluate the algorithm's performance in subsets of images without staining, acetic acid, lugol, and after manipulation of the anal canal. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the curve were calculated.

RESULTS

The convolutional neural network achieved an overall accuracy of 98.3%. The algorithm had a sensitivity and specificity of 97.4% and 99.2%, respectively. The accuracy of the algorithm for differentiating high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion vs low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion varied between 91.5% (postmanipulation) and 100% (lugol) for the categories at subanalysis. The area under the curve ranged between 0.95 and 1.00.

DISCUSSION

The introduction of AI to HRA may provide an accurate detection and differentiation of ASCC precursors. Our algorithm showed excellent performance at different staining settings. This is extremely important because real-time AI models during HRA examinations can help guide local treatment or detect relapsing disease.

Artificial intelligence for characterization of diminutive colorectal polyps: A feasibility study comparing two computer-aided diagnosis systems

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) has potential in the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility of the real-time use of the computer-aided diagnosis system (CADx) AI for ColoRectal Polyps (AI4CRP) for the optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps and to compare the performance with CAD EYE^TM (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan). CADx influence on the optical diagnosis of an expert endoscopist was also investigated.

METHODS

AI4CRP was developed in-house and CAD EYE was proprietary software provided by Fujifilm. Both CADx-systems exploit convolutional neural networks. Colorectal polyps were characterized as benign or premalignant and histopathology was used as gold standard. AI4CRP provided an objective assessment of its characterization by presenting a calibrated confidence characterization value (range 0.0-1.0). A predefined cut-off value of 0.6 was set with values < 0.6 indicating benign and values ≥ 0.6 indicating premalignant colorectal polyps. Low confidence characterizations were defined as values 40% around the cut-off value of 0.6 (< 0.36 and > 0.76). Self-critical AI4CRP’s diagnostic performances excluded low confidence characterizations.

RESULTS

AI4CRP use was feasible and performed on 30 patients with 51 colorectal polyps. Self-critical AI4CRP, excluding 14 low confidence characterizations [27.5% (14/51)], had a diagnostic accuracy of 89.2%, sensitivity of 89.7%, and specificity of 87.5%, which was higher compared to AI4CRP. CAD EYE had a 83.7% diagnostic accuracy, 74.2% sensitivity, and 100.0% specificity. Diagnostic performances of the endoscopist alone (before AI) increased non-significantly after reviewing the CADx characterizations of both AI4CRP and CAD EYE (AI-assisted endoscopist). Diagnostic performances of the AI-assisted endoscopist were higher compared to both CADx-systems, except for specificity for which CAD EYE performed best.

CONCLUSION

Real-time use of AI4CRP was feasible. Objective confidence values provided by a CADx is novel and self-critical AI4CRP showed higher diagnostic performances compared to AI4CRP.

Artificial Intelligence-assisted colonoscopy and colorectal cancer screening: Where are we going?

Colorectal cancer is a significant global health concern, necessitating effective screening strategies to reduce its incidence and mortality rates. Colonoscopy plays a crucial role in the detection and removal of colorectal neoplastic precursors. However, there are limitations and variations in the performance of endoscopists, leading to missed lesions and suboptimal outcomes. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) in endoscopy offers promising opportunities to improve the quality and efficacy of screening colonoscopies. In particular, AI applications, including computer-aided detection (CADe) and computer-aided characterization (CADx), have demonstrated the potential to enhance adenoma detection and optical diagnosis accuracy. Additionally, AI-assisted quality control systems aim to standardize the endoscopic examination process. This narrative review provides an overview of AI principles and discusses the current knowledge on AI-assisted endoscopy in the context of screening colonoscopies. It highlights the significant role of AI in improving lesion detection, characterization, and quality assurance during colonoscopy. However, further well-designed studies are needed to validate the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted colonoscopy before its widespread implementation.

Feasibility and safety of endoscopic resection for the jejunoileal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) for jejunoileal lesions (JILs) has been technically challenging. We aimed to characterize the clinicopathologic characteristics, feasibility, and safety of ER for JILs.

METHOD

We retrospectively investigated 52 patients with JILs who underwent ER from January 2012 to February 2022. We collected and analyzed clinicopathological characteristics, procedure-related parameters, outcomes, and follow-up data.

RESULTS

The mean age was 49.4 years. Of the 52 JILs, 33 ileal tumors within 20 cm from the ileocecal valve were resected with colonoscopy, while 19 tumors in the jejunum or the ileum over 20 cm from the ileocecal valve received enteroscopy resection. The mean procedure duration was 49.0 min. The en bloc resection and en bloc with R0 resection rates were 86.5% and 84.6%, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) included one (1.9%) major AE (delayed bleeding) and five (9.6%) minor AEs. During a median follow-up of 36.5 months, two patients had local recurrence (3.8%), while none had metastases. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 92.9% and 94.1%, respectively. Compared with the enteroscopy group, overall AEs were significantly lower in the colonoscopy group (P < 0.05), but no statistical differences were observed in RFS (P = 0.412) and DSS (P = 0.579). There were no significant differences in AEs, RFS, and DSS between the endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and the endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) group.

CONCLUSIONS

ER of JILs has favorable short-term and long-term outcomes. Both ESD and EMR can safely and effectively resect JILs in appropriately selected cases.

Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown.

METHODS

We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate.

RESULTS

A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).

Reading of small bowel capsule endoscopy after frame reduction using an artificial intelligence algorithm

OBJECTIVES

Poorly visualized images that appear during small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) can confuse the interpretation of small bowel lesions and increase the physician's workload. Using a validated artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm that can evaluate the mucosal visualization, we aimed to assess whether SBCE reading after the removal of poorly visualized images could affect the diagnosis of SBCE.

METHODS

A study was conducted to analyze 90 SBCE cases in which a small bowel examination was completed. Two experienced endoscopists alternately performed two types of readings. They used the AI algorithm to remove poorly visualized images for the frame reduction reading (AI user group) and conducted whole frame reading without AI (AI non-user group) for the same patient. A poorly visualized image was defined as an image with < 50% mucosal visualization. The study outcomes were diagnostic concordance and reading time between the two groups. The SBCE diagnosis was classified as Crohn's disease, bleeding, polyp, angiodysplasia, and nonspecific finding.

RESULTS

The final SBCE diagnoses between the two groups showed statistically significant diagnostic concordance (k = 0.954, p < 0.001). The mean number of lesion images was 3008.5 ± 9964.9 in the AI non-user group and 1401.7 ± 4811.3 in the AI user group. There were no cases in which lesions were completely removed. Compared with the AI non-user group (120.9 min), the reading time was reduced by 35.6% in the AI user group (77.9 min).

CONCLUSIONS

SBCE reading after reducing poorly visualized frames using the AI algorithm did not have a negative effect on the final diagnosis. SBCE reading method integrated with frame reduction and mucosal visualization evaluation will help improve AI-assisted SBCE interpretation.

Curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma has been increasing rapidly in the Western world. A well-known risk factor for developing this type of tumour is reflux disease, which can cause metaplasia from the squamous cell mucosa to columnar epithelium (Barrett's Oesophagus) which can progress to dysplasia and eventually adenocarcinoma. With the rise of the incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, research on the best way to manage this disease is of great importance and has changed treatment modalities over the last decades. The gold standard for superficial adenocarcinoma has shifted from surgical to endoscopic management when certain criteria are met. This review will discuss the different curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Combined gastric and colorectal cancer endoscopic screening may be cost-effective in Europe with the implementation of artificial intelligence: an economic evaluation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer (GC) is not recommended in low-intermediate incidence countries. Artificial intelligence (AI) has high accuracy in GC detection and might increase the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of AI for GC detection in settings with different GC incidence and different accuracies of AI systems.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness analysis (using Markov model) comparing different screening strategies (no screening versus single esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at 50 years versus stand-alone EGD every 5/10 years versus combined EGD and screening colonoscopy once or twice per decade in Netherlands, Italy and Portugal) with variable AI accuracy settings. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the different strategies versus no screening. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Without AI, one single EGD at 50 years (Netherlands, Italy, Portugal), EGD combined with screening colonoscopy once per decade (Italy and Portugal) and EGD combined with screening colonoscopy twice per decade (Portugal) are cost-effective when compared with no screening. If AI increases the accuracy of EGD by at least 1% in comparison to the accuracy of white-light endoscopy accuracy (89%), combined screening twice per decade also becomes cost-effective in Italy. If AI accuracy reaches at least 96%, combined screening once per decade is also cost-effective in the Netherlands.

DISCUSSION

In European countries, AI-assisted EGD may improve the cost-effectiveness of GC screening with combined EGD and screening colonoscopy. The actual effect of AI on cost-effectiveness may vary dependent on the accuracy and costs of the AI system.

Impact of AI-aided colonoscopy in clinical practice: a prospective randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a significant role in cancer-related mortality. Colonoscopy, combined with adenoma removal, has proven effective in reducing CRC incidence. However, suboptimal colonoscopy quality often leads to missed polyps. The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on adenoma and polyp detection rate (ADR, PDR) is yet to be established.

DESIGN

We conducted a randomised controlled trial at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Sweden. Patients underwent colonoscopy with or without the assistance of AI (AI-C or conventional colonoscopy (CC)). Examinations were performed with two different AI systems, that is, Fujifilm CADEye and Medtronic GI Genius. The primary outcome was ADR.

RESULTS

Among 286 patients, 240 underwent analysis (average age: 66 years). The ADR was 42% for all patients, and no significant difference emerged between AI-C and CC groups (41% vs 43%). The overall PDR was 61%, with a trend towards higher PDR in the AI-C group. Subgroup analysis revealed higher detection rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL) with AI assistance (AI-C 22%, CC 11%, p=0.004). No difference was noticed in the detection of polyps or adenomas per colonoscopy. Examinations were most often performed by experienced endoscopists, 78% (n=86 AI-C, 100 CC).

CONCLUSION

Amidst the ongoing AI integration, ADR did not improve with AI. Particularly noteworthy is the enhanced detection rates for SSL by AI assistance, especially since they pose a risk for postcolonoscopy CRC. The integration of AI into standard colonoscopy practice warrants further investigation and the development of improved software might be necessary before enforcing its mandatory implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05178095.

Latest Advances in Endoscopic Detection of Oesophageal and Gastric Neoplasia

Endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of cancers and cancer precursors in the oesophagus and stomach. Early detection of upper GI cancers requires high-quality endoscopy and awareness of the subtle features these lesions carry. Endoscopists performing surveillance of high-risk patients including those with Barrett's oesophagus, previous squamous neoplasia or chronic atrophic gastritis should be familiar with endoscopic features, classification systems and sampling techniques to maximise the detection of early cancer. In this article, we review the current approach to diagnosis of these conditions and the latest advanced imaging and diagnostic techniques.

From Data to Insights: How Is AI Revolutionizing Small-Bowel Endoscopy?

The role of capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy in managing various small-bowel pathologies is well-established. However, their broader application has been hampered mainly by their lengthy reading times. As a result, there is a growing interest in employing artificial intelligence (AI) in these diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, driven by the prospect of overcoming some major limitations and enhancing healthcare efficiency, while maintaining high accuracy levels. In the past two decades, the applicability of AI to gastroenterology has been increasing, mainly because of the strong imaging component. Nowadays, there are a multitude of studies using AI, specifically using convolutional neural networks, that prove the potential applications of AI to these endoscopic techniques, achieving remarkable results. These findings suggest that there is ample opportunity for AI to expand its presence in the management of gastroenterology diseases and, in the future, catalyze a game-changing transformation in clinical activities. This review provides an overview of the current state-of-the-art of AI in the scope of small-bowel study, with a particular focus on capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy.

Artificial Intelligence-assisted Analysis of Pan-enteric Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Suspected Crohn's Disease: A Study on Diagnostic Performance

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Pan-enteric capsule endoscopy [PCE] is a highly sensitive but time-consuming tool for detecting pathology. Artificial intelligence [AI] algorithms might offer a possibility to assist in the review and reduce the analysis time of PCE. This study examines the agreement between PCE assessments aided by AI technology and standard evaluations, in patients suspected of Crohn's disease [CD].

METHOD

PCEs from a prospective, blinded, multicentre study, including patients suspected of CD, were processed by the deep learning solution AXARO® [Augmented Endoscopy, Paris, France]. Based on the image output, two observers classified the patient's PCE as normal or suggestive of CD, ulcerative colitis, or cancer. The primary outcome was per-patient sensitivities and specificities for detecting CD and inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. Complete reading of PCE served as the reference standard.

RESULTS

A total of 131 patients' PCEs were analysed, with a median recording time of 303 min. The AXARO® framework reduced output to a median of 470 images [2.1%] per patient, and the pooled median review time was 3.2 min per patient. For detecting CD, the observers had a sensitivity of 96% and 92% and a specificity of 93% and 90%, respectively. For the detection of IBD, both observers had a sensitivity of 97% and had a specificity of 91% and 90%, respectively. The negative predictive value was 95% for CD and 97% for IBD.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the AXARO® framework reduced the initial review time substantially while maintaining high diagnostic accuracy-suggesting its use as a rapid tool to rule out IBD in PCEs of patients suspected of Crohn's disease.

The Role of Capsule Endoscopy in the Diagnosis and Management of Small Bowel Tumors: A Narrative Review

Small bowel tumors (SBT) are relatively rare, but have had a steadily increasing incidence in the last few decades. Small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) and device-assisted enteroscopy are the main endoscopic techniques for the study of the small bowel, the latter additionally providing sampling and therapeutic options, and hence acting complementary to SBCE in the diagnostic work-up. Although a single diagnostic modality is often insufficient in the setting of SBTs, SBCE is a fundamental tool to drive further management towards a definitive diagnosis. The aim of this paper is to provide a concise narrative review of the role of SBCE in the diagnosis and management of SBTs.

The Future of Minimally Invasive Capsule Panendoscopy: Robotic Precision, Wireless Imaging and AI-Driven Insights

In the early 2000s, the introduction of single-camera wireless capsule endoscopy (CE) redefined small bowel study. Progress continued with the development of double-camera devices, first for the colon and rectum, and then, for panenteric assessment. Advancements continued with magnetic capsule endoscopy (MCE), particularly when assisted by a robotic arm, designed to enhance gastric evaluation. Indeed, as CE provides full visualization of the entire gastrointestinal (GI) tract, a minimally invasive capsule panendoscopy (CPE) could be a feasible alternative, despite its time-consuming nature and learning curve, assuming appropriate bowel cleansing has been carried out. Recent progress in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly in the development of convolutional neural networks (CNN) for CE auxiliary reading (detecting and diagnosing), may provide the missing link in fulfilling the goal of establishing the use of panendoscopy, although prospective studies are still needed to validate these models in actual clinical scenarios. Recent CE advancements will be discussed, focusing on the current evidence on CNN developments, and their real-life implementation potential and associated ethical challenges.

The 2022 top 10 list of endoscopy topics in medical publishing: an annual review by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Editorial Board

Using a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2022 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals, the 10-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy composed a list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy during the study year. Each Editorial Board member was directed to consider 3 criteria in generating candidate lists-significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice-and subject matter consensus was facilitated by the Chair through electronic voting. The 10 identified areas collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic spheres: artificial intelligence, endoscopic submucosal dissection, Barrett's esophagus, interventional EUS, endoscopic resection techniques, pancreaticobiliary endoscopy, management of acute pancreatitis, endoscopic environmental sustainability, the NordICC trial, and spiral enteroscopy. Each board member was assigned a consensus topic area around which to summarize relevant important articles, thereby generating this précis of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2022.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2:  ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3:  ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4:  ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5:  ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6:  ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7:  ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8:  ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9:  ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B:  ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C:  ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D:  ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E:  ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11:  After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Lesion Detection and Lesion Characterization

Colorectal cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide, despite the widespread uptake of population surveillance strategies. This is in part due to the persistent development of 'interval colorectal cancers', where patients develop colorectal cancer despite appropriate surveillance intervals, implying pre-malignant polyps were not resected at a prior colonoscopy. Multiple techniques have been developed to improve the sensitivity and accuracy of lesion detection and characterisation in an effort to improve the efficacy of colorectal cancer screening, thereby reducing the incidence of interval colorectal cancers. This article presents a comprehensive review of the transformative role of artificial intelligence (AI), which has recently emerged as one such solution for improving the quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. Firstly, AI-driven algorithms demonstrate remarkable potential in addressing the challenge of overlooked polyps, particularly polyp subtypes infamous for escaping human detection because of their inconspicuous appearance. Secondly, AI empowers gastroenterologists without exhaustive training in advanced mucosal imaging to characterise polyps with accuracy similar to that of expert interventionalists, reducing the dependence on pathologic evaluation and guiding appropriate resection techniques or referrals for more complex resections. AI in colonoscopy holds the potential to advance the detection and characterisation of polyps, addressing current limitations and improving patient outcomes. The integration of AI technologies into routine colonoscopy represents a promising step towards more effective colorectal cancer screening and prevention.

Artificial intelligence for gastroenterology: Singapore artificial intelligence for Gastroenterology Working Group Position Statement

BACKGROUND

Successful implementation of artificial intelligence in gastroenterology and hepatology practice requires more than technology. There are ethical, legal, and social issues that need to be settled.

AIM

A group consisting of AI developers (engineer), AI users (gastroenterologist, hepatologist, and surgeon) and AI regulators (ethicist and administrator) formed a Working Group to draft these Positions Statements with the objective of arousing public and professional interest and dialogue, to promote ethical considerations when implementing AI technology, to suggest to policy makers and health authorities relevant factors to take into account when approving and regulating the use of AI tools, and to engage the profession in preparing for change in clinical practice.

STATEMENTS

These series of Position Statements point out the salient issues to maintain the trust between care provider and care receivers, and to legitimize the use of a non-human tool in healthcare delivery. It is based on fundamental principles such as respect, autonomy, privacy, responsibility, and justice. Enforcing the use of AI without considering these factor risk damaging the doctor-patient relationship.

Capsule endoscopy with artificial intelligence-assisted technology: Real-world usage of a validated AI model for capsule image review

Background and study aims Capsule endoscopy is a time-consuming procedure with a significance error rate. Artificial intelligence (AI) can potentially reduce reading time significantly by reducing the number of images that need human review. An OMOM Artificial Intelligence-enabled small bowel capsule has been recently trained and validated for small bowel capsule endoscopy video review. This study aimed to assess its performance in a real-world setting in comparison with standard reading methods. Patients and methods In this single-center retrospective study, 40 patient studies performed using the OMOM capsule were analyzed first with standard reading methods and later using AI-assisted reading. Reading time, pathology identified, intestinal landmark identification and bowel preparation assessment (Brotz Score) were compared. Results Overall diagnosis correlated 100% between the two reading methods. In a per-lesion analysis, 1293 images of significant lesions were identified combining standard and AI-assisted reading methods. AI-assisted reading captured 1268 (98.1%, 95% CI 97.15-98.7) of these findings while standard reading mode captured 1114 (86.2%, 95% confidence interval 84.2-87.9), P < 0.001. Mean reading time went from 29.7 minutes with standard reading to 2.3 minutes with AI-assisted reading ( P < 0.001), for an average time saving of 27.4 minutes per study. Time of first cecal image showed a wide discrepancy between AI and standard reading of 99.2 minutes (r = 0.085, P = 0.68). Bowel cleansing evaluation agreed in 97.4% (r = 0.805 P < 0.001). Conclusions AI-assisted reading has shown significant time savings without reducing sensitivity in this study. Limitations remain in the evaluation of other indicators.

Accuracy of polyp characterization by artificial intelligence and endoscopists: a prospective, non-randomized study in a tertiary endoscopy center

Background and study aims Artificial intelligence (AI) in gastrointestinal endoscopy is developing very fast. Computer-aided detection of polyps and computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for polyp characterization are available now. This study was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a new commercially available CADx system in clinical practice. Patients and methods This prospective, non-randomized study was performed at a tertiary academic endoscopy center from March to August 2022. We included patients receiving a colonoscopy. Polypectomy had to be performed in all polyps. Every patient was examined concurrently by an endoscopist and AI using two opposing screens. The AI system, overseen by a second observer, was not visible to the endoscopist. The primary outcome was accuracy of the AI classifying the polyps into "neoplastic" and "non-neoplastic." The secondary outcome was accuracy of the classification by the endoscopists. Sessile serrated lesions were classified as neoplastic. Results We included 156 patients (mean age 65; 57 women) with 262 polyps ≤10 mm. Eighty-four were hyperplastic polyps (32.1%), 158 adenomas (60.3%), seven sessile serrated lesions (2.7%) and 13 other entities (normal/inflammatory colonmucosa, lymphoidic polyp) (4.9%) on histological diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of AI were 89.70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.02%-93.88%), 75.26% (95% CI: 65.46%-83.46%) and 84.35% (95% CI:79.38%-88.53%), respectively. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for less experienced endoscopists (2-5 years of endoscopy) were 95.56% (95% CI: 84.85%-99.46%), 61.54% (95% CI: 40.57%-79.77%) and 83.10% (95% CI: 72.34%-90.95%) and for experienced endoscopists 90.83% (95% CI: 84.19%-95.33%), 71.83% (95% CI: 59.90%-81.87%) and 83.77% (95% CI: 77.76%-88.70%), respectively. Conclusion Accuracy for polyp characterization by a new commercially available AI system is high, but does not fulfill the criteria for a "resect-and-discard" strategy.

Endoscopic ultrasound artificial intelligence-assisted for prediction of gastrointestinal stromal tumors diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Subepithelial lesions (SELs) are gastrointestinal tumors with heterogeneous malignant potential. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the leading method for evaluation, but without histopathological analysis, precise differentiation of SEL risk is limited. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising aid for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal lesions in the absence of histopathology.

AIM

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of AI-assisted EUS in diagnosing SELs, especially lesions originating from the muscularis propria layer.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched. Patients of any sex and > 18 years, with SELs assessed by EUS AI-assisted, with previous histopathological diagnosis, and presented sufficient data values which were extracted to construct a 2 × 2 table. The reference standard was histopathology. The primary outcome was the accuracy of AI for gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Secondary outcomes were AI-assisted EUS diagnosis for GIST vs gastrointestinal leiomyoma (GIL), the diagnostic performance of experienced endoscopists for GIST, and GIST vs GIL. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were calculated. The corresponding summary receiver operating characteristic curve and post-test probability were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Eight retrospective studies with a total of 2355 patients and 44154 images were included in this meta-analysis. The AI-assisted EUS for GIST diagnosis showed a sensitivity of 92% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.95; P < 0.01), specificity of 80% (95%CI: 0.75-0.85; P < 0.01), and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.949. For diagnosis of GIST vs GIL by AI-assisted EUS, specificity was 90% (95%CI: 0.88-0.95; P = 0.02) and AUC of 0.966. The experienced endoscopists' values were sensitivity of 72% (95%CI: 0.67-0.76; P < 0.01), specificity of 70% (95%CI: 0.64-0.76; P < 0.01), and AUC of 0.777 for GIST. Evaluating GIST vs GIL, the experts achieved a sensitivity of 73% (95%CI: 0.65-0.80; P < 0.01) and an AUC of 0.819.

CONCLUSION

AI-assisted EUS has high diagnostic accuracy for fourth-layer SELs, especially for GIST, demonstrating superiority compared to experienced endoscopists' and improving their diagnostic performance in the absence of invasive procedures.

Endoscopic Treatment of T1 Colorectal Cancer

Commonly accepted criteria for curative resection of T1 colorectal cancer include R0 resection with horizontal and vertical clear margins (R0), absence of lympho-vascular or vessel infiltration (L0, V0), a low to moderate histological grading (G1/2), low tumor cell budding, and limited (<1000 µm) infiltration into the submucosa. However, submucosal infiltration depth in the absence of other high-risk features has recently been questioned as a high-risk situation for lymph-node metastasis. Consequently, endoscopic resection techniques should focus on the acquisition of qualitatively and quantitively sufficient submucosal tissue. Here, we summarize the current literature on lymph-node metastasis risk after endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal cancer. Moreover, we discuss different endoscopic resection techniques with respect to the quality of the resected specimen.

New Technologies in Digestive Endoscopy for Ulcerative Colitis Patients

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease primarily affecting the colon and rectum. Endoscopy plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and management of UC. Recent advancements in endoscopic technology, including chromoendoscopy, confocal laser endomicroscopy, endocytoscopy and the use of artificial intelligence, have revolutionized the assessment and treatment of UC patients. These innovative techniques enable early detection of dysplasia and cancer, more precise characterization of disease extent and severity and more targeted biopsies, leading to improved diagnosis and disease monitoring. Furthermore, these advancements have significant implications for therapeutic decision making, empowering clinicians to carefully consider a range of treatment options, including pharmacological therapies, endoscopic interventions and surgical approaches. In this review, we provide an overview of the latest endoscopic technologies and their applications for diagnosing and monitoring UC. We also discuss their impact on treatment decision making, highlighting the potential benefits and limitations of each technique.

Robotic Colonoscopy and Beyond: Insights into Modern Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Lower gastrointestinal endoscopy is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis and removal of colonic polyps. Delays in colonoscopy following a positive fecal immunochemical test increase the likelihood of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer (CRC) occurrence. However, patients may refuse to undergo conventional colonoscopy (CC) due to fear of possible risks and pain or discomfort. In this regard, patients undergoing CC frequently require sedation to better tolerate the procedure, increasing the risk of deep sedation or other complications related to sedation. Accordingly, the use of CC as a first-line screening strategy for CRC is hampered by patients' reluctance due to its invasiveness and anxiety about possible discomfort. To overcome the limitations of CC and improve patients' compliance, several studies have investigated the use of robotic colonoscopy (RC) both in experimental models and in vivo. Self-propelling robotic colonoscopes have proven to be promising thanks to their peculiar dexterity and adaptability to the shape of the lower gastrointestinal tract, allowing a virtually painless examination of the colon. In some instances, when alternatives to CC and RC are required, barium enema (BE), computed tomographic colonography (CTC), and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) may be options. However, BE and CTC are limited by the need for subsequent investigations whenever suspicious lesions are found. In this narrative review, we discussed the current clinical applications of RC, CTC, and CCE, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of different endoscopic procedures, with a particular focus on RC.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Gastric Cancer: Surgical and Therapeutic Perspectives: A Comprehensive Review

Stomach cancer has a high annual mortality rate worldwide necessitating early detection and accurate treatment. Even experienced specialists can make erroneous judgments based on several factors. Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are being developed rapidly to assist in this field. Here, we aimed to determine how AI technology is used in gastric cancer diagnosis and analyze how it helps patients and surgeons. Early detection and correct treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC) can greatly increase survival rates. To determine this, it is important to accurately determine the diagnosis and depth of the lesion and the presence or absence of metastasis to the lymph nodes, and suggest an appropriate treatment method. The deep learning algorithm, which has learned gastric lesion endoscopyimages, morphological characteristics, and patient clinical information, detects gastric lesions with high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, and predicts morphological characteristics. Through this, AI assists the judgment of specialists to help select the correct treatment method among endoscopic procedures and radical resections and helps to predict the resection margins of lesions. Additionally, AI technology has increased the diagnostic rate of both relatively inexperienced and skilled endoscopic diagnosticians. However, there were limitations in the data used for learning, such as the amount of quantitatively insufficient data, retrospective study design, single-center design, and cases of non-various lesions. Nevertheless, this assisted endoscopic diagnosis technology that incorporates deep learning technology is sufficiently practical and future-oriented and can play an important role in suggesting accurate treatment plans to surgeons for resection of lesions in the treatment of EGC.

Adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy: how can it be improved?

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of widespread colonoscopy screening programs has helped in decreasing the incidence of Colorectal Cancer (CRC). However, 'back-to-back' colonoscopies revealed relevant percentage of missed adenomas. Quality indicators were created to further homogenize detection performances and decrease the incidence of post-colonoscopy CRC. Among them, the Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR), defined as the percentage obtained by dividing the number of endoscopic procedures in which at least one adenoma was resected, by the total number of procedures, was found to be inversely associated with the risks of interval colorectal cancer, advanced-stage interval cancer, and fatal interval cancer.

AREAS COVERED

In this paper, we performed a comprehensive review of the literature focusing on promising new devices and technologies, which are meant to positively affect the endoscopist performance in detecting adenomas, therefore increasing ADR.

EXPERT OPINION

Considering the current knowledge, although several devices and technologies have been proposed with this intent, the recent implementation of AI ranked over all of the other strategies and it is likely to become the new standard within few years. However, the combination of different device/technologies need to be investigated in the future aiming at even further increasing of endoscopist detection performances.

Research trends on artificial intelligence and endoscopy in digestive diseases: A bibliometric analysis from 1990 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) has been widely used in gastrointestinal endoscopy examinations.

AIM

To comprehensively evaluate the application of AI-assisted endoscopy in detecting different digestive diseases using bibliometric analysis.

METHODS

Relevant publications from the Web of Science published from 1990 to 2022 were extracted using a combination of the search terms “AI” and “endoscopy”. The following information was recorded from the included publications: Title, author, institution, country, endoscopy type, disease type, performance of AI, publication, citation, journal and H-index.

RESULTS

A total of 446 studies were included. The number of articles reached its peak in 2021, and the annual citation numbers increased after 2006. China, the United States and Japan were dominant countries in this field, accounting for 28.7%, 16.8%, and 15.7% of publications, respectively. The Tada Tomohiro Institute of Gastroenterology and Proctology was the most influential institution. “Cancer” and “polyps” were the hotspots in this field. Colorectal polyps were the most concerning and researched disease, followed by gastric cancer and gastrointestinal bleeding. Conventional endoscopy was the most common type of examination. The accuracy of AI in detecting Barrett’s esophagus, colorectal polyps and gastric cancer from 2018 to 2022 is 87.6%, 93.7% and 88.3%, respectively. The detection rates of adenoma and gastrointestinal bleeding from 2018 to 2022 are 31.3% and 96.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

AI could improve the detection rate of digestive tract diseases and a convolutional neural network-based diagnosis program for endoscopic images shows promising results.

Artificial Intelligence Applied to Colonoscopy: Is It Time to Take a Step Forward?

Growing evidence indicates that artificial intelligence (AI) applied to medicine is here to stay. In gastroenterology, AI computer vision applications have been stated as a research priority. The two main AI system categories are computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) and computer-assisted diagnosis (CADx). However, other fields of expansion are those related to colonoscopy quality, such as methods to objectively assess colon cleansing during the colonoscopy, as well as devices to automatically predict and improve bowel cleansing before the examination, predict deep submucosal invasion, obtain a reliable measurement of colorectal polyps and accurately locate colorectal lesions in the colon. Although growing evidence indicates that AI systems could improve some of these quality metrics, there are concerns regarding cost-effectiveness, and large and multicentric randomized studies with strong outcomes, such as post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, are lacking. The integration of all these tasks into one quality-improvement device could facilitate the incorporation of AI systems in clinical practice. In this manuscript, the current status of the role of AI in colonoscopy is reviewed, as well as its current applications, drawbacks and areas for improvement.

Deep-Learning-Enabled Computer-Aided Diagnosis in the Classification of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions on Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy

Accurate classification of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) is important to facilitate proper treatment and to improve patient outcomes. We utilized the convolutional neural network (CNN) of VGG19 to develop a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system in the classification of subtypes of PCLs in endoscopic ultrasound-guided needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE). From a retrospectively collected 22,424 nCLE video frames (50 videos) as the training/validation set and 11,047 nCLE video frames (18 videos) as the test set, we developed and compared the diagnostic performance of three CNNs with distinct methods of designating the region of interest. The diagnostic accuracy for subtypes of PCLs by CNNs with manual, maximal rectangular, and U-Net algorithm-designated ROIs was 100%, 38.9%, and 66.7% on a per-video basis and 88.99%, 73.94%, and 76.12% on a per-frame basis, respectively. Our per-frame analysis suggested differential levels of diagnostic accuracy among the five subtypes of PCLs, where non-mucinous PCLs (serous cystic neoplasm: 93.11%, cystic neuroendocrine tumor: 84.31%, and pseudocyst: 98%) had higher diagnostic accuracy than mucinous PCLs (intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm: 84.43% and mucinous cystic neoplasm: 86.1%). Our CNN demonstrated superior specificity compared to the state-of-the-art for the classification of mucinous PCLs (IPMN and MCN), with high specificity (94.3% and 92.8%, respectively) but low sensitivity (46% and 45.2%, respectively). This suggests the complimentary role of CNN-enabled CAD systems, especially for clinically suspected mucinous PCLs.

Artificial Intelligence-Aided Endoscopy and Colorectal Cancer Screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, with the highest incidence reported in high-income countries. However, because of the slow progression of neoplastic precursors, along with the opportunity for their endoscopic detection and resection, a well-designed endoscopic screening program is expected to strongly decrease colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. In this regard, quality of colonoscopy has been clearly related with the risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Recently, the development of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in the medical field has been growing in interest. Through machine learning processes, and, more recently, deep learning, if a very high numbers of learning samples are available, AI systems may automatically extract specific features from endoscopic images/videos without human intervention, helping the endoscopists in different aspects of their daily practice. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on AI-aided endoscopy, and to outline its potential role in colorectal cancer prevention.

Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Using Magnifying and Nonmagnifying Narrow-Band Imaging Endoscopy

Several endoscopic findings obtained by magnifying image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) are reportedly correlated with gastric intestinal metaplasia (IM); however, the differences between magnifying and nonmagnifying IEE for the diagnosis of gastric IM remain unknown. This study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent narrow-band imaging endoscopy. Four areas of the stomach were evaluated using nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE. Light-blue crest (LBC), white opaque substance (WOS), and endoscopic grading of the gastric IM (EGGIM) were assessed. The concordance rates between nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE were 80.5% for LBC and 93.3% for WOS. The strength of agreement between each observation technique showed good reproducibility, with a kappa value of 0.69 and 0.83 for LBC and WOS, respectively. The individual EGGIM score indicated a good correlation between nonmagnifying and magnifying IEE (concordance rate, 75%; kappa value, 0.67). The prevalence of a high EGGIM score in patients with and without gastric cancer (GC) showed a significant difference both with nonmagnifying IEE (odds ratio (OR), 3.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-9.0), and magnifying IEE (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1-8.9). Nonmagnifying IEE has the potential to stratify the individual risk of GC, similar to magnifying IEE, warranting further investigation with histological assessment.