Direct comparison of multiple computer-aided polyp detection systems.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based systems for computer-aided detection (CADe) of polyps receive regular updates and occasionally offer customizable detection thresholds, both of which impact their performance, but little is known about these effects. This study aimed to compare the performance of different CADe systems on the same benchmark dataset. METHODS: 101 colonoscopy videos were used as benchmark. Each video frame with a visible polyp was manually annotated with bounding boxes, resulting in 129 705 polyp images. The videos were then analyzed by three different CADe systems, representing five conditions: two versions of GI Genius, Endo-AID with detection Types A and B, and EndoMind, a freely available system. Evaluation included an analysis of sensitivity and false-positive rate, among other metrics. RESULTS: Endo-AID detection Type A, the earlier version of GI Genius, and EndoMind detected all 93 polyps. Both the later version of GI Genius and Endo-AID Type B missed 1 polyp. The mean per-frame sensitivities were 50.63 % and 67.85 %, respectively, for the earlier and later versions of GI Genius, 65.60 % and 52.95 %, respectively, for Endo-AID Types A and B, and 60.22 % for EndoMind. CONCLUSIONS: This study compares the performance of different CADe systems, different updates, and different configuration modes. This might help clinicians to select the most appropriate system for their specific needs.

Assisted documentation as a new focus for artificial intelligence in endoscopy: the precedent of reliable withdrawal time and image reporting.

BACKGROUND : Reliable documentation is essential for maintaining quality standards in endoscopy; however, in clinical practice, report quality varies. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI)-based prototype for the measurement of withdrawal and intervention times, and automatic photodocumentation. METHOD: A multiclass deep learning algorithm distinguishing different endoscopic image content was trained with 10 557 images (1300 examinations, nine centers, four processors). Consecutively, the algorithm was used to calculate withdrawal time (AI prediction) and extract relevant images. Validation was performed on 100 colonoscopy videos (five centers). The reported and AI-predicted withdrawal times were compared with video-based measurement; photodocumentation was compared for documented polypectomies. RESULTS: Video-based measurement in 100 colonoscopies revealed a median absolute difference of 2.0 minutes between the measured and reported withdrawal times, compared with 0.4 minutes for AI predictions. The original photodocumentation represented the cecum in 88 examinations compared with 98/100 examinations for the AI-generated documentation. For 39/104 polypectomies, the examiners' photographs included the instrument, compared with 68 for the AI images. Lastly, we demonstrated real-time capability (10 colonoscopies). CONCLUSION : Our AI system calculates withdrawal time, provides an image report, and is real-time ready. After further validation, the system may improve standardized reporting, while decreasing the workload created by routine documentation.

New Concept of External and Independent Next-to-the-Scope Intraluminal Grasping Device (EINTS).

Background: Interventional endoscopic procedures require complex manipulations and precise maneuvering of end-effectors. One focus in research on improved endoscopic instrument function was based on surgical experience to gain additional traction. The idea has emerged using assisting instruments by applying external tools next-to-the endoscope to follow surgical concepts. The aim of this study is the assessment of flexible endoscopic grasping instruments regarding their function and working-radius introducing the concept of an intraluminal "next-to the-scope" endoscopic grasper. Methods: In this study endoscopic graspers are evaluated (1:through-the-scope-grasper, TTSG; 2:additional-working-channel-system AWC-S;3:external-independent-next-to-the-scope-grasper EINTS-G) regarding their working-radius, grasping abilities, maneuverability and the ability to expose tissue with varying angulation. Results: The working radius of the tools attached or within the endoscope (TTS-G and AWC-S) benefit from the steering abilities of the scope reaching 180-210 degrees in retroflexion; EINTS-G is limited to 110-degrees. The robust EINTS-grasper has the advantage of stronger grip for grasping and pulling force, which enables manipulation of larger objects. The independent maneuverability during ESD-dissection provides better tissue-exposure by changing the traction-angulation. Conclusion: The working radius of tools attached to the endoscope benefit from scope- steering. The EINTS-grasper has the advantage of stronger grasping force and pulling within the GI-tract and independent maneuverability enables improved tissue-exposure. WC200.

Artificial intelligence-based polyp size measurement in gastrointestinal endoscopy using the auxiliary waterjet as a reference.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of colorectal polyp size during endoscopy is mainly performed visually. In this work, we propose a novel polyp size measurement system (Poseidon) based on artificial intelligence (AI) using the auxiliary waterjet as a measurement reference. METHODS: Visual estimation, biopsy forceps-based estimation, and Poseidon were compared using a computed tomography colonography-based silicone model with 28 polyps of defined sizes. Four experienced gastroenterologists estimated polyp sizes visually and with biopsy forceps. Furthermore, the gastroenterologists recorded images of each polyp with the waterjet in proximity for the application of Poseidon. Additionally, Poseidon's measurements of 29 colorectal polyps during routine clinical practice were compared with visual estimates. RESULTS: In the silicone model, visual estimation had the largest median percentage error of 25.1 % (95 %CI 19.1 %-30.4 %), followed by biopsy forceps-based estimation: median 20.0 % (95 %CI 14.4 %-25.6 %). Poseidon gave a significantly lower median percentage error of 7.4 % (95 %CI 5.0 %-9.4 %) compared with other methods. During routine colonoscopies, Poseidon presented a significantly lower median percentage error (7.7 %, 95 %CI 6.1 %-9.3 %) than visual estimation (22.1 %, 95 %CI 15.1 %-26.9 %). CONCLUSION: In this work, we present a novel AI-based method for measuring colorectal polyp size with significantly higher accuracy than other common sizing methods.

A Real-Time Polyp-Detection System with Clinical Application in Colonoscopy Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. The best method to prevent CRC is with a colonoscopy. During this procedure, the gastroenterologist searches for polyps. However, there is a potential risk of polyps being missed by the gastroenterologist. Automated detection of polyps helps to assist the gastroenterologist during a colonoscopy. There are already publications examining the problem of polyp detection in the literature. Nevertheless, most of these systems are only used in the research context and are not implemented for clinical application. Therefore, we introduce the first fully open-source automated polyp-detection system scoring best on current benchmark data and implementing it ready for clinical application. To create the polyp-detection system (ENDOMIND-Advanced), we combined our own collected data from different hospitals and practices in Germany with open-source datasets to create a dataset with over 500,000 annotated images. ENDOMIND-Advanced leverages a post-processing technique based on video detection to work in real-time with a stream of images. It is integrated into a prototype ready for application in clinical interventions. We achieve better performance compared to the best system in the literature and score a F1-score of 90.24% on the open-source CVC-VideoClinicDB benchmark.

A video based benchmark data set (ENDOTEST) to evaluate computer-aided polyp detection systems.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) may become a standard for polyp detection during colonoscopy. Several systems are already commercially available. We report on a video-based benchmark technique for the first preclinical assessment of such systems before comparative randomized trials are to be undertaken. Additionally, we compare a commercially available CADe system with our newly developed one. METHODS: ENDOTEST consisted in the combination of two datasets. The validation dataset contained 48 video-snippets with 22,856 manually annotated images of which 53.2% contained polyps. The performance dataset contained 10 full-length screening colonoscopies with 230,898 manually annotated images of which 15.8% contained a polyp. Assessment parameters were accuracy for polyp detection and time delay to first polyp detection after polyp appearance (FDT). Two CADe systems were assessed: a commercial CADe system (GI-Genius, Medtronic), and a self-developed new system (ENDOMIND). The latter being a convolutional neuronal network trained on 194,983 manually labeled images extracted from colonoscopy videos recorded in mainly six different gastroenterologic practices. RESULTS: On the ENDOTEST, both CADe systems detected all polyps in at least one image. The per-frame sensitivity and specificity in full colonoscopies was 48.1% and 93.7%, respectively for GI-Genius; and 54% and 92.7%, respectively for ENDOMIND. Median FDT of ENDOMIND with 217 ms (Inter-Quartile Range(IQR)8-1533) was significantly faster than GI-Genius with 1050 ms (IQR 358-2767, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Our benchmark ENDOTEST may be helpful for preclinical testing of new CADe devices. There seems to be a correlation between a shorter FDT with a higher sensitivity and a lower specificity for polyp detection.

Pilot study of a new freely available computer-aided polyp detection system in clinical practice.

PURPOSE: Computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) systems for colonoscopy are already presented to increase adenoma detection rate (ADR) in randomized clinical trials. Those commercially available closed systems often do not allow for data collection and algorithm optimization, for example regarding the usage of different endoscopy processors. Here, we present the first clinical experiences of a, for research purposes publicly available, CADe system. METHODS: We developed an end-to-end data acquisition and polyp detection system named EndoMind. Examiners of four centers utilizing four different endoscopy processors used EndoMind during their clinical routine. Detected polyps, ADR, time to first detection of a polyp (TFD), and system usability were evaluated (NCT05006092). RESULTS: During 41 colonoscopies, EndoMind detected 29 of 29 adenomas in 66 of 66 polyps resulting in an ADR of 41.5%. Median TFD was 130 ms (95%-CI, 80-200 ms) while maintaining a median false positive rate of 2.2% (95%-CI, 1.7-2.8%). The four participating centers rated the system using the System Usability Scale with a median of 96.3 (95%-CI, 70-100). CONCLUSION: EndoMind's ability to acquire data, detect polyps in real-time, and high usability score indicate substantial practical value for research and clinical practice. Still, clinical benefit, measured by ADR, has to be determined in a prospective randomized controlled trial.

The influence of computer-aided polyp detection systems on reaction time for polyp detection and eye gaze.

BACKGROUND: Multiple computer-aided systems for polyp detection (CADe) have been introduced into clinical practice, with an unclear effect on examiner behavior. This study aimed to measure the influence of a CADe system on reaction time, mucosa misinterpretation, and changes in visual gaze pattern. METHODS: Participants with variable levels of colonoscopy experience viewed video sequences (n = 29) while eye movement was tracked. Using a crossover design, videos were presented in two assessments, with and without CADe support. Reaction time for polyp detection and eye-tracking metrics were evaluated. RESULTS: 21 participants performed 1218 experiments. CADe was significantly faster in detecting polyps compared with participants (median 1.16 seconds [99 %CI 0.40-3.43] vs. 2.97 seconds [99 %CI 2.53-3.77], respectively). However, the reaction time of participants when using CADe (median 2.90 seconds [99 %CI 2.55-3.38]) was similar to that without CADe. CADe increased misinterpretation of normal mucosa and reduced the eye travel distance. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirm that CADe systems detect polyps faster than humans. However, use of CADe did not improve human reaction times. It increased misinterpretation of normal mucosa and decreased the eye travel distance. Possible consequences of these findings might be prolonged examination time and deskilling.

New concept for colonoscopy including side optics and artificial intelligence.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adenoma detection rate is the crucial parameter for colorectal cancer screening. Increasing the field of view with additional side optics has been reported to detect flat adenomas hidden behind folds. Furthermore, artificial intelligence (AI) has also recently been introduced to detect more adenomas. We therefore aimed to combine both technologies in a new prototypic colonoscopy concept. METHODS: A 3-dimensional-printed cap including 2 microcameras was attached to a conventional endoscope. The prototype was applied in 8 gene-targeted pigs with mutations in the adenomatous polyposis coli gene. The first 4 animals were used to train an AI system based on the images generated by microcameras. Thereafter, the conceptual prototype for detecting adenomas was tested in a further series of 4 pigs. RESULTS: Using our prototype, we detected, with side optics, adenomas that might have been missed conventionally. Furthermore, the newly developed AI could detect, mark, and present adenomas visualized with side optics outside of the conventional field of view. CONCLUSIONS: Combining AI with side optics might help detect adenomas that otherwise might have been missed.