Publication:
Effectiveness of a deep-learning polyp detection system in prospectively collected colonoscopy videos with variable bowel preparation quality

dc.contributor.coauthorBecq, Aymeric
dc.contributor.coauthorChandnani, Madhuri
dc.contributor.coauthorBharadwaj, Shishira
dc.contributor.coauthorErnest-Suarez, Kenneth
dc.contributor.coauthorGabr, Moamen
dc.contributor.coauthorGlissen-Brown, Jeremy
dc.contributor.coauthorSawhney, Mandeep
dc.contributor.coauthorPleskow, Douglas K.
dc.contributor.coauthorBerzin, Tyler M.
dc.contributor.kuauthorBaran, Bülent
dc.contributor.kuprofileFaculty Member
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.yokid167583
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-09T22:48:46Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.abstractBackground: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for polyp detection, but polyps may be missed. Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies may assist in polyp detection. To date, most studies for polyp detection have validated algorithms in ideal endoscopic conditions. Aim: To evaluate the performance of a deep-learning algorithm for polyp detection in a real-world setting of routine colonoscopy with variable bowel preparation quality. Methods: We performed a prospective, single-center study of 50 consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy. Procedural videos were analyzed by a validated deep-learning AI polyp detection software that labeled suspected polyps. Videos were then re-read by 5 experienced endoscopists to categorize all possible polyps identified by the endoscopist and/or AI, and to measure Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Results: In total, 55 polyps were detected and removed by the endoscopist. The AI system identified 401 possible polyps. A total of 100 (24.9%) were categorized as "definite polyps;" 53/100 were identified and removed by the endoscopist. A total of 63 (15.6%) were categorized as "possible polyps" and were not removed by the endoscopist. In total, 238/401 were categorized as false positives. Two polyps identified by the endoscopist were missed by AI (false negatives). The sensitivity of AI for polyp detection was 98.8%, the positive predictive value was 40.6%. The polyp detection rate for the endoscopist was 62% versus 82% for the AI system. Mean segmental Boston Bowel Preparation Scale were similar (2.64, 2.59,P=0.47) for true and false positives, respectively. Conclusions: A deep-learning algorithm can function effectively to detect polyps in a prospectively collected series of colonoscopies, even in the setting of variable preparation quality.
dc.description.indexedbyWoS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.issue6
dc.description.openaccessNO
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.volume54
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/MCG.0000000000001272
dc.identifier.eissn1539-2031
dc.identifier.issn0192-0790
dc.identifier.quartileQ3
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85075871364
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000001272
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/6387
dc.identifier.wos542968600012
dc.keywordsColon polyp detection
dc.keywordsArtificial intelligence
dc.keywordsDeep learning
dc.keywordsVariable bowel preparation adenoma detection rate
dc.keywordsTrainee participation
dc.keywordsMiss rate
dc.keywordsMulticenter
dc.keywordsIndicators
dc.keywordsIncreases
dc.keywordsRates
dc.keywordsRisk
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherLippincott Williams and Wilkins
dc.sourceJournal of Clinical Gastroenterology
dc.subjectGastroenterology
dc.subjectHepatology
dc.titleEffectiveness of a deep-learning polyp detection system in prospectively collected colonoscopy videos with variable bowel preparation quality
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.authorid0000-0001-7966-2346
local.contributor.kuauthorBaran, Bülent

Files