Performance of a new integrated computer-assisted system (CADe/CADx) for detection and characterization of colorectal neoplasia.
Journal
Endoscopy
ISSN: 1438-8812
Titre abrégé: Endoscopy
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0215166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2022
02 2022
Historique:
aheadofprint:
25
01
2021
pubmed:
26
1
2021
medline:
26
3
2022
entrez:
25
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Use of artificial intelligence may increase detection of colorectal neoplasia at colonoscopy by improving lesion recognition (CADe) and reduce pathology costs by improving optical diagnosis (CADx). A multicenter library of ≥ 200 000 images from 1572 polyps was used to train a combined CADe/CADx system. System testing was performed on two independent image sets (CADe: 446 with polyps, 234 without; CADx: 267) from 234 polyps, which were also evaluated by six endoscopists (three experts, three non-experts). CADe showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.9 %, 90.6 %, and 91.7 %, respectively. Experts showed significantly higher accuracy and specificity, and similar sensitivity, while non-experts + CADe showed comparable sensitivity but lower specificity and accuracy than CADe and experts. CADx showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 85.0 %, 79.4 %, and 83.6 %, respectively. Experts showed comparable performance, whereas non-experts + CADx showed comparable accuracy but lower specificity than CADx and experts. The high accuracy shown by CADe and CADx was similar to that of experts, supporting further evaluation in a clinical setting. When using CAD, non-experts achieved a similar performance to experts, with suboptimal specificity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Use of artificial intelligence may increase detection of colorectal neoplasia at colonoscopy by improving lesion recognition (CADe) and reduce pathology costs by improving optical diagnosis (CADx).
METHODS
A multicenter library of ≥ 200 000 images from 1572 polyps was used to train a combined CADe/CADx system. System testing was performed on two independent image sets (CADe: 446 with polyps, 234 without; CADx: 267) from 234 polyps, which were also evaluated by six endoscopists (three experts, three non-experts).
RESULTS
CADe showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.9 %, 90.6 %, and 91.7 %, respectively. Experts showed significantly higher accuracy and specificity, and similar sensitivity, while non-experts + CADe showed comparable sensitivity but lower specificity and accuracy than CADe and experts. CADx showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 85.0 %, 79.4 %, and 83.6 %, respectively. Experts showed comparable performance, whereas non-experts + CADx showed comparable accuracy but lower specificity than CADx and experts.
CONCLUSIONS
The high accuracy shown by CADe and CADx was similar to that of experts, supporting further evaluation in a clinical setting. When using CAD, non-experts achieved a similar performance to experts, with suboptimal specificity.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
180-184Informations de copyright
Thieme. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Jochen Weigt, Alessandro Repici, Cesare Hassan, and Helmut Neumann are consultants for Fujifilm. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.