Inter- and Intraobserver Variability on Endoscopic Scoring Systems in Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy scoring is a key component in the diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). Variability in endoscopic scoring can impact patient trial eligibility and treatment effect measurement. In this study, we examine inter- and intraobserver variability of inflammatory bowel disease endoscopic scoring systems in a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We included observational studies that evaluated the inter- and intraobserver variability using UC (endoscopic Mayo Score [eMS], Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity [UCEIS]) or CD (Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity [CDEIS], Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [SES-CD]) systems among adults (≥18 years of age) and were published in English. The strength of agreement was categorized as fair, moderate, good, and very good. RESULTS: A total of 6003 records were identified. After screening, 13 studies were included in our analysis. The overall interobserver agreement rates were 0.58 for eMS, 0.66 for UCEIS, 0.80 for CDEIS, and 0.78 for SES-CD. The overall heterogeneity (I2) for these systems ranged from 93.2% to 99.2%. A few studies assessed the intraobserver agreement rate. The overall effect sizes were 0.75 for eMS, 0.87 for UCEIS, 0.89 for CDEIS, and 0.91 for SES-CD. CONCLUSIONS: The interobserver agreement rates for eMS, UCEIS, CDEIS, and SES-CD ranged from moderate to good. The intraobserver agreement rates for eMS, UCEIS, CDEIS, and SES-CD ranged from good to very good. Solutions to improve interobserver agreement could allow for more accurate patient assessment, leading to richer, more accurate clinical management and clinical trial data.

This study examined the inter- and intraobserver variability of inflammatory bowel disease endoscopic scoring systems (endoscopic Mayo Score, Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity, Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity, Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease) in a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Endoscopist-Level and Procedure-Level Factors Associated With Increased Adenoma Detection With the Use of a Computer-Aided Detection Device.

INTRODUCTION: To investigate the impact of procedure-related and endoscopist-related factors on the effectiveness of a computer-aided detection (CADe) device in adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) detection. METHODS: The SKOUT clinical trial was conducted at 5 US sites. We present prespecified analyses of procedure-related and endoscopist-related factors, and association with APC across treatment and control cohorts. RESULTS: There were numeric increases in APC between SKOUT vs standard colonoscopy in community-based endoscopists, withdrawal time of ≥8 minutes, for endoscopists with >20 years of experience, and endoscopists with baseline adenoma detection rate <45%. DISCUSSION: The application of CADe devices in clinical practice should be carefully evaluated. Larger studies should explore differences in endoscopist-related factors for CADe.

Computer-Aided Detection Improves Adenomas per Colonoscopy for Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening is endoscopist dependent, and colonoscopy quality improvement programs aim to improve efficacy. This study evaluated the clinical benefit and safety of using a computer-aided detection (CADe) device in colonoscopy procedures. METHODS: This randomized study prospectively evaluated the use of a CADe device at 5 academic and community centers by US board-certified gastroenterologists (n = 22). Participants aged ≥40 scheduled for screening or surveillance (≥3 years) colonoscopy were included; exclusion criteria included incomplete procedure, diagnostic indication, inflammatory bowel disease, and familial adenomatous polyposis. Patients were randomized by endoscopist to the standard or CADe colonoscopy arm using computer-generated, random-block method. The 2 primary endpoints were adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), the total number of adenomas resected divided by the total number of colonoscopies; and true histology rate (THR), the proportion of resections with clinically significant histology divided by the total number of polyp resections. The primary analysis used a modified intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: Between January and September 2021, 1440 participants were enrolled to be randomized. After exclusion of participants who did not meet the eligibility criteria, 677 in the standard arm and 682 in the CADe arm were included in a modified intention-to-treat analysis. APC increased significantly with use of the CADe device (standard vs CADe: 0.83 vs 1.05, P = .002; total number of adenomas, 562 vs 719). There was no decrease in THR with use of the CADe device (standard vs CADe: 71.7% vs 67.4%, P for noninferiority < .001; total number of non-neoplastic lesions, 284 vs 375). Adenoma detection rate was 43.9% and 47.8% in the standard and CADe arms, respectively (P = .065). CONCLUSIONS: For experienced endoscopists performing screening and surveillance colonoscopies in the United States, the CADe device statistically improved overall adenoma detection (APC) without a concomitant increase in resection of non-neoplastic lesions (THR). CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration: NCT04754347.

Improvement in adenoma detection using a novel artificial intelligence-aided polyp detection device.

Background and study aims Detecting colorectal neoplasia is the goal of high-quality screening and surveillance colonoscopy, as reflected by high adenoma detection rate (ADR) and adenomas per colonoscopy (APC). The aim of our study was to evaluate the performance of a novel artificial intelligence (AI)-aided polyp detection device, Skout, with the primary endpoints of ADR and APC in routine colonoscopy. Patients and methods We compared ADR and APC in a cohort of outpatients undergoing routine high-resolution colonoscopy with and without the use of a real-time, AI-aided polyp detection device. Patients undergoing colonoscopy with Skout were enrolled in a single-arm, unblinded, prospective trial and the results were compared with a historical cohort. All resected polyps were examined histologically. Results Eighty-three patients undergoing screening and surveillance colonoscopy at an outpatient endoscopy center were enrolled and outcomes compared with 283 historical control patients. Overall, ADR with and without Skout was 54.2 % and 40.6 % respectively ( P  = 0.028) and 53.6 % and 30.8 %, respectively, in screening exams ( P  = 0.024). Overall, APC rate with and without Skout was 1.46 and 1.01, respectively, ( P  = 0.104) and 1.18 and 0.50, respectively, in screening exams ( P  = 0.002). Overall, true histology rate (THR) with and without Skout was 73.8 % and 78.4 %, respectively, ( P  = 0.463) and 75.0 % and 71.0 %, respectively, in screening exams ( P  = 0.731). Conclusion We have demonstrated that our novel AI-aided polyp detection device increased the ADR in a cohort of patients undergoing screening and surveillance colonoscopy without a significant concomitant increase in hyperplastic polyp resection. AI-aided colonoscopy has the potential for improving the outcomes of patients undergoing colonoscopy.

Designing safer analgesics: a focus on µ-opioid receptor pathways.

INTRODUCTION: The recent dramatic increase in intentional and unintentional deaths attributed to opioids has refocused attention on the therapeutic ratio (risk-benefit ratio) of opioid analgesics. Almost all traditional opioid analgesics produce their effects (therapeutic and adverse) via the activation of µ-opioid receptor (MOR) pathways. It is therefore important to examine the question of whether this natural endogenous pathway can still be activated, but with greater safety. Areas covered: Other comprehensive reviews have focused on pharmacokinetic (e.g. peripheral restriction) and pharmacodynamic (e.g. functional selectivity, biased ligand) approaches. Herein, the authors focus on a different approach, specifically, multi-mechanistic 'atypical opioids' that synergistically combines MOR activation plus one or more non-opioid mechanism of analgesic action. Expert opinion: Four 'atypical opioid' analgesics on the market act as µ-opioid receptor pathway agonists but have a non-opioid mechanism of action that significantly contributes to the analgesic effect. The multi-mechanistic action of these products confers particular clinical utility in that they provide effective analgesia with relatively lower opioid load, and they are generally associated with fewer or less severe opioid-related adverse effects and less abuse compared to traditional opioid analgesics.

The role of cannabinoids in pain control: the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Cannabinoids appear to possess many potential medical uses, which may extend to pain control. A narrative review of the literature has found a variety of studies testing botanical and synthetic cannabinoids in different pain syndromes (acute pain, cancer pain, chronic noncancer pain, fibromyalgia pain, migraine, neuropathic pain, visceral pain, and others). Results from these studies are mixed; cannabinoids appear to be most effective in controlling neuropathic pain, allodynia, medication-rebound headache, and chronic noncancer pain, but do not seem to offer any advantage over nonopioid analgesics for acute pain. Cannabinoids seem to work no better than placebo for visceral pain and conferred only modest analgesic effect in cancer pain. Cannabinoids do many good things - they appear to be effective in treating certain types of pain without the issues of tolerance associated with opioids. Negatively, marijuana currently has a very murky legal status all over the world - laws regulating its use are inconsistent and in flux. Thus, both patients and prescribers may be unsure about whether or not it is an appropriate form of pain control. Cannabinoid-based analgesia has been linked to potential memory deficits and cognitive impairment. A great deal more remains to be elucidated about cannabinoids which may emerge to play an important role in the treatment of neuropathic and possibly other painful conditions. There remains a great deal more to learn about the role of cannabinoids in pain management.

Driving under the influence of opioids: What prescribers should know.

Opioids affect the central nervous system and are known to produce dizziness, sleepiness, mood changes, and other actions that in some people have a negative impact on psychomotor or mental performance. The negative effects can be exacerbated in persons who are taking other prescription medications or illegal substances. Opioid-abusing drivers clearly represent an unnecessary danger to the public; although the vast majority of patients taking prescription opioids for pain safely drive to work and other activities, a subset may be impaired, but not be aware of or recognize the problem. The majority of pain patients would likely be surprised to learn that the legal systems in most parts of the world, including most states in the United States, do not differentiate between a pain patient taking a prescribed opioid at the right dose and frequency, and an abuser taking an illegal drug. For example, in some parts of the United States, a driver may be initially stopped for a relatively minor offense and, if the officer notices that the driver is wearing a fentanyl patch, charged with driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). The present narrative review attempts to highlight the existing problem, the different legal thresholds for arrest and prosecution for DUID, and the challenge of trying to have zero-tolerance for driving under the influence of a drug used illegally, while at the same time not arresting legitimate patients who are taking pain medication as prescribed. There is a clear and present need for an integrated assessment and addressing of the current confounding situation.