Colonoscopy, a crucial procedure for detecting and removing colorectal polyps, has seen transformative advancements through the integration of artificial intelligence, specifically in computer-aided detection (CADe) and diagnosis (CADx). These tools enhance real-time detection and characterization of lesions, potentially reducing human error, and standardizing the quality of colonoscopy across endoscopists. CADe has proven effective in increasing adenoma detection rate, potentially reducing long-term colorectal cancer incidence. However, CADe's benefits are accompanied by challenges, such as potentially longer procedure times, increased non-neoplastic polyp resections, and a higher surveillance burden. CADx, although promising in differentiating neoplastic and non-neoplastic diminutive polyps, encounters limitations in accuracy, particularly in the proximal colon. Real-world data also revealed gaps between trial efficacy and practical outcomes, emphasizing the need for further research in uncontrolled settings. Moreover, CADx limited specificity and binary output underscore the necessity for explainable artificial intelligence to gain endoscopists' trust. This review aimed to explore the benefits, harms, and limitations of artificial intelligence for colon cancer screening, surveillance, and treatment focusing on CADe and CADx systems for lesion detection and characterization, respectively, while addressing challenges in integrating these technologies into clinical practice.

Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) assists endoscopists in differentiating between neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps during colonoscopy. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of polyp location (proximal vs. distal colon) on the diagnostic performance of CADx for ≤5 mm polyps.

We searched for studies evaluating the performance of real-time CADx alone (ie, independently of endoscopist judgement) for predicting the histology of colorectal polyps ≤5 mm. The primary endpoints were CADx sensitivity and specificity in the proximal and distal colon. Secondary outcomes were the negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and the accuracy of the CADx alone. Distal colon was limited to the rectum and sigmoid.

We included 11 studies for analysis with a total of 7782 polyps ≤5 mm. CADx specificity was significantly lower in the proximal colon compared with the distal colon (62% vs 85%; risk ratio (RR), 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.84). Conversely, sensitivity was similar (89% vs 87%); RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03). The NPV (64% vs 93%; RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.64-0.79) and accuracy (81% vs 86%; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99) were significantly lower in the proximal than distal colon, whereas PPV was higher in the proximal colon (87% vs 76%; RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.17).

The diagnostic performance of CADx for polyps in the proximal colon is inadequate, exhibiting significantly lower specificity compared with its performance for distal polyps. Although current CADx systems are suitable for use in the distal colon, they should not be employed for proximal polyps until more performant systems are developed specifically for these lesions.

 Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) enables the distinction between neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps during colonoscopy. We aimed to estimate the patient-level benefit and harm of CADx.

 We conducted a comparative analysis on data from the EndoBRAIN international clinical trial, evaluating the effect of optical diagnosis during colonoscopy with and without CADx. Three hypothetical scenarios were compared: "endoscopist-alone" and "CADx-assisted" leave-in-situ strategies (leaving non-neoplastic rectosigmoid polyps ≤ 5 mm), and "total removal" (removing all detected polyps). Primary outcomes included patient-level colonoscopy-related cost and surveillance interval agreement (colorectal cancer risk category). Estimates were calculated based on national reimbursement rates and guidelines in four countries.

 We analyzed 1134 patients (59 % men, median age 67 years) with 1716 polyps. Compared with total removal, the endoscopist-alone and CADx-assisted leave-in-situ strategies reduced the removed polyps per patient from 1.51 (95 %CI 1.48-1.54) to 1.18 (95 %CI 1.16-1.20) and 1.12 (95 %CI 1.00-1.14), respectively; however, 0.023 (95 %CI 0.015-0.033) and 0.021 (95 %CI 0.014-0.031) neoplasms per patient were left in situ, respectively. The mean colonoscopy cost decreased by $44 (endoscopist alone) and $46 (CADx assistance) in the USA, $22 and $19 in the UK, $21 and $19 in Japan, and $32 and $30 in Norway, respectively. Surveillance interval agreement decreased to 99.2 % (endoscopist alone) and 99.0 % (CADx assistance) in the USA, 99.8 % and 99.8 % in the UK, 97.9 % and 97.1 % in Japan, and 99.9 % and 99.9 % in Norway, respectively.

 Both endoscopist-alone and CADx-assisted optical diagnosis reduce colonoscopy costs. The risk of missed adenomas and surveillance interval deviations appear marginal.

This review aims to highlight the transformative impact of artificial intelligence in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy, particularly in the detection and characterization of colorectal polyps.

Over the past decade, artificial intelligence has significantly advanced the medical industry, including gastrointestinal endoscopy. Computer aided diagnosis - detection (CADe) systems have shown notable success in increasing ADR. Recent meta-analyses of RCTs have demonstrated that patients undergoing colonoscopy with CADe assistance had a higher ADR compared with conventional methods. Similarly, computer aided diagnosis - characterization (CADx) systems have proven effective in distinguishing between adenomatous and nonadenomatous polyps, enhancing diagnostic confidence and supporting cost-saving measures like the resect-and-discard strategy. Despite the high performance of these systems, the variability in real-world adoption highlights the importance of integrating artificial intelligence as an assistive tool rather than a replacement for human expertise.

Artificial intelligence integration in colonoscopy, through CADe and CADx systems, marks a significant advancement in gastroenterology. These systems enhance lesion detection and characterization, leading to improved diagnostic accuracy, training outcomes, and clinical workflow efficiency. While artificial intelligence offers substantial benefits, the optimal approach involves using artificial intelligence to augment the expertise of endoscopists, ensuring that clinical decisions remain under human oversight.

The resect-and-discard strategy allows endoscopists to replace post-polypectomy pathology with real-time prediction of polyp histology during colonoscopy (optical diagnosis). We aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of implementing computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for polyp pathology into the resect-and-discard strategy.

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from database inception to June 5, 2024, without language restrictions, for diagnostic accuracy studies that assessed the performance of real-time CADx systems, compared with histology, for the optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps (≤5 mm) in the entire colon. We synthesised data for three strategies: CADx-alone, CADx-unassisted, and CADx-assisted; when the endoscopist was involved in the optical diagnosis, we synthesised data exclusively from diagnoses for which confidence in the prediction was reported as high. The primary outcomes were the proportion of polyps that would have avoided pathological assessment (ie, the proportion optically diagnosed with high confidence; main benefit) and the proportion of polyps incorrectly predicted due to false positives and false negatives (main harm), directly compared between CADx-assisted and CADx-unassisted strategies. We used DerSimonian and Laird's random-effects model to calculate all outcomes. We used Higgins I2 to assess heterogeneity, the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to rate certainty, and funnel plots and Egger's test to examine publication bias. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024508440.

We found 1019 studies, of which 11 (7400 diminutive polyps, 3769 patients, and 185 endoscopists) were included in the final meta-analysis. Three studies (1817 patients and 4086 polyps [2148 neoplastic and 1938 non-neoplastic]) provided data to directly compare the primary outcome measures between the CADx-unassisted and CADx-assisted strategies. We found no significant difference between the CADx-assisted and CADx-unassisted strategies for the proportion of polyps that would have avoided pathological assessment (90% [88-93], 3653 [89·4%] of 4086 polyps diagnosed with high confidence vs 90% [95% CI 85-94], 3588 [87·8%] of 4086 polyps diagnosed with high confidence; risk ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·99-1·04; I2=53·49%; low-certainty evidence; Egger's test p=0·18). The proportion of incorrectly predicted polyps was lower with the CADx-assisted strategy than with the CADx-unassisted strategy (12% [95% CI 7-17], 523 [14·3%] of 3653 polyps incorrectly predicted with a CADx-assisted strategy vs 13% [6-20], 582 [16·2%] of 3588 polyps incorrectly diagnosed with a CADx-unassisted strategy; risk ratio 0·88 [95% CI 0·79-0·98]; I2=0·00%; low-certainty evidence; Egger's test p=0·18).

CADx did not produce benefit nor harm for the resect-and-discard strategy, questioning its value in clinical practice. Improving the accuracy and explainability of CADx is desired.

European Commission (Horizon Europe), the Japan Society of Promotion of Science, and Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro.

<b>Indroduction:</b> Colonoscopy is an acclaimed screening test to detect colorectal cancer (CRC). The most important quality indicators for colonoscopy are adenoma detection rate (ADR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), withdrawal time (WT), and bowel preparation (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale; BBPS). In modern endoscopy practice, the human eye is enhanced by highdefinition white-light visualization and advanced imaging technology. The main limitation of this procedure is the detection rate of suspicious lesions. The next generation of endoscopes with 4K resolution and computer-aided detection (CADe) based on artificial intelligence (AI) may be the next step to improve the quality of tests performed.<b>Aim:</b> The aim was to assess the effect of CADe implementation in the environment of the latest generation of endoscopes and 4K visualization in retrospective analysis.<b>Methods:</b> The study included 2,000 patients over 18 years old who underwent colonoscopy for various indications. Olympus Endo-Aid CADe AI system was used, together with the latest X1 series endoscope set using LED lighting and 4K ultra high-resolution technology. Group I consisted of 1,000 consecutive tests performed using Endo-Aid CADe, and group II the first 1,000 consecutive tests without the CADe system. ADR, Advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), and mean polyp per patient score (MPP) were assessed in each group<b>Results:</b> A total of 2,000 participants were included in the analysis, divided into two groups regarding CADe implementation. The overall PDR was similar in the analyzed groups (AI: 46.7% <i>vs.</i> non-AI: 44.9%, P = 0.419). Both ADR (29.7 <i>vs.</i> 28.9%, P = 0.694) and AADR (6.9 <i>vs.</i> 7.1%, P = 0.861) changed unremarkably. However, a significant elevation in MPP was noted. The MPP rose from 0.85 in the non-AI group to 1.26 in the AI group (P<0.001). The comparative analysis conducted separately for each segment of the bowel revealed that PDR remarkably increased in the left colon (29.3 <i>vs.</i> 18.0%, P<0.001), with no difference for other segments and other parameters. Investigating the MPP separately in each segment showed a significant difference for the right colon (0.33 <i>vs.</i> 0.23, P = 0.032) and the left colon (0.47 <i>vs.</i> 0.28, P<0.001). When adjusted to bowel preparation the PDR and MPP were constantly higher in the AI group (29.3 <i>vs.</i> 19.0%, P<0.001, and 0.48 <i>vs.</i> 0.30, P<0.001, respectively). In addition, the significant impact of AI implementation on MPP faded in the right colon (0.33 <i>vs.</i> 0.24, P = 0.051) when compared with the overall analysis.<b>Conclusions:</b> Although recently published evidence is optimistic regarding AI efficiency in improving the quality of colonoscopy, the provided results widen the overall perspective. Prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including procedures performed with newest generation scopes should elucidate the role of AI in high-resolution colonoscopy.

Artificial intelligence (AI) using deep learning systems has recently been utilized in various medical fields. In the field of gastroenterology, AI is primarily implemented in image recognition and utilized in the realm of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. In GI endoscopy, computer-aided detection/diagnosis (CAD) systems assist endoscopists in GI neoplasm detection or differentiation of cancerous or noncancerous lesions. Several AI systems for colorectal polyps have already been applied in colonoscopy clinical practices. In esophagogastroduodenoscopy, a few CAD systems for upper GI neoplasms have been launched in Asian countries. The usefulness of these CAD systems in GI endoscopy has been gradually elucidated.

In this review, we outline recent articles on several studies of endoscopic AI systems for GI neoplasms, focusing on esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), gastric cancer (GC), and colorectal polyps. In ESCC and EAC, computer-aided detection (CADe) systems were mainly developed, and a recent meta-analysis study showed sensitivities of 91.2% and 93.1% and specificities of 80% and 86.9%, respectively. In GC, a recent meta-analysis study on CADe systems demonstrated that their sensitivity and specificity were as high as 90%. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) also showed that the use of the CADe system reduced the miss rate. Regarding computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems for GC, although RCTs have not yet been conducted, most studies have demonstrated expert-level performance. In colorectal polyps, multiple RCTs have shown the usefulness of the CADe system for improving the polyp detection rate, and several CADx systems have been shown to have high accuracy in colorectal polyp differentiation.

Most analyses of endoscopic AI systems suggested that their performance was better than that of nonexpert endoscopists and equivalent to that of expert endoscopists. Thus, endoscopic AI systems may be useful for reducing the risk of overlooking lesions and improving the diagnostic ability of endoscopists.

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.

The introduction of artificial intelligence into the medical field has improved the diagnostic capabilities of physicians. However, few studies have analyzed the economic impact of employing artificial intelligence technologies in the clinical environment. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a computer-assisted diagnosis (CADx) system designed to support clinicians in differentiating early gastric cancers from non-cancerous lesions in Japan, where the universal health insurance system was introduced.

The target population to be used for the CADx was estimated as those with moderate to severe gastritis caused by Helicobacter pylori infection. Decision trees with Markov models were built to analyze the cumulative cost-effectiveness of using CADx relative to the pre-artificial intelligence status quo, a condition reconstructed from data in published reports. After conducting a base-case analysis, we performed sensitivity analyses by modifying several parameters. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Compared with the status quo as represented in the base-case analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CADx in the Japanese market was forecasted to be 11,093 USD per quality-adjusted life year. The sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the expected incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were within the willingness-to-pay threshold of 50,000 USD per quality-adjusted life year when the cost of the CAD was less than 104 USD.

Using CADx for EGCs may decrease their misdiagnosis, contributing to improved cost-effectiveness in Japan.

Gallbladder (GB) disease is classified into two broad categories: GB wall-thickening and protuberant lesions, which include various lesions, such as adenomyomatosis, cholecystitis, GB polyps, and GB carcinoma. This review summarizes recent advances in the differential diagnosis of GB lesions, focusing primarily on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and related technologies. Fundamental B-mode EUS and contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) have been reported to be useful for the diagnosis of GB diseases because they can evaluate the thickening of the GB wall and protuberant lesions in detail. We also outline the current status of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for GB lesions, as there have been scattered reports on EUS-FNA in recent years. Furthermore, artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, ranging from machine learning to deep learning, have become popular in healthcare for disease diagnosis, drug discovery, drug development, and patient risk identification. In this review, we outline the current status of AI in the diagnosis of GB.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a promising tool in pathology, including cancer diagnosis, subtyping, grading, and prognostic prediction.

The aim of the study is to assess AI application in prostate cancer (PCa) histology. We carried out a systematic literature search in 3 databases. Primary outcome was AI accuracy in differentiating between PCa and benign hyperplasia. Secondary outcomes were AI accuracy in determining Gleason grade and agreement among AI and pathologists.

Our final sample consists of 24 studies conducted from 2007 to 2021. They aggregate data from roughly 8000 cases of prostate biopsy and 458 cases of radical prostatectomy (RP). Sensitivity for PCa diagnostic exceeded 90% and ranged from 87% to 100%, and specificity varied from 68% to 99%. Overall accuracy ranged from 83.7% to 98.3% with AUC reaching 0.99. The meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method showed pooled sensitivity of 0.96 with I2 = 80.7% and pooled specificity of 0.95 with I2 = 86.1%. Pooled positive likehood ratio was 15.3 with I2 = 87.3% and negative - was 0.04 with I2 = 78.6%. SROC (symmetric receiver operating characteristics) curve represents AUC = 0.99. For grading the accuracy of AI was lower: sensitivity for Gleason grading ranged from 77% to 87%, and specificity from 82% to 90%.

The accuracy of AI for PCa identification and grading is comparable to expert pathologists. This is a promising approach which has several possible clinical applications resulting in expedite and optimize pathology reports. AI introduction into common practice may be limited by difficult and time-consuming convolutional neural network training and tuning.

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update (CPU) is to review the available evidence and provide expert commentary on the current landscape of artificial intelligence in the evaluation and management of colorectal polyps.

This CPU was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This Expert Commentary incorporates important as well as recently published studies in this field, and it reflects the experiences of the authors who are experienced endoscopists with expertise in the field of artificial intelligence and colorectal polyps.

Gastrointestinal cancers are characterized by high incidence and mortality. However, there are well-established methods of screening. The endoscopy exam provides the macroscopical image and enables harvesting the tissue samples for further histopathological diagnosis. The efficiency of endoscopies relies not only on proper patient preparation, but also on the skills of the personnel conducting the exam. In recent years, a number of reports concerning the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine have arisen. Numerous studies aimed to assess the utility of deep learning/ neural network systems supporting endoscopies. In this review, we summarized the most recent reports and randomized clinical trials regarding the application of AI in screening and surveillance of gastrointestinal cancers among patients suffering from esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancer, along with the advantages, limitations, and controversies of those novel solutions.

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.

Artificial intelligence shows promise for clinical research in inflammatory bowel disease endoscopy. Accurate assessment of endoscopic activity is important in clinical practice and inflammatory bowel disease clinical trials. Emerging artificial intelligence technologies can increase efficiency and accuracy of assessing the baseline endoscopic appearance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and the impact that therapeutic interventions may have on mucosal healing in both of these contexts. In this review, state-of-the-art endoscopic assessment of mucosal disease activity in inflammatory bowel disease clinical trials is described, covering the potential for artificial intelligence to transform the current paradigm, its limitations, and suggested next steps. Site-based artificial intelligence quality evaluation and inclusion of patients in clinical trials without the need for a central reader is proposed; for following patient progress, a second reading using AI alongside a central reader with expedited reading is proposed. Artificial intelligence will support precision endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease and is on the threshold of advancing inflammatory bowel disease clinical trial recruitment.

Artificial intelligence (AI) plays a more and more important role in our everyday life due to the advantages that it brings when used, such as 24/7 availability, a very low percentage of errors, ability to provide real time insights, or performing a fast analysis. AI is increasingly being used in clinical medical and dental healthcare analyses, with valuable applications, which include disease diagnosis, risk assessment, treatment planning, and drug discovery. This paper presents a narrative literature review of AI use in healthcare from a multi-disciplinary perspective, specifically in the cardiology, allergology, endocrinology, and dental fields. The paper highlights data from recent research and development efforts in AI for healthcare, as well as challenges and limitations associated with AI implementation, such as data privacy and security considerations, along with ethical and legal concerns. The regulation of responsible design, development, and use of AI in healthcare is still in early stages due to the rapid evolution of the field. However, it is our duty to carefully consider the ethical implications of implementing AI and to respond appropriately. With the potential to reshape healthcare delivery and enhance patient outcomes, AI systems continue to reveal their capabilities.

Artificial intelligence-aided colonoscopy significantly improves adenoma detection. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of the GI Genius technology, an artificial intelligence-aided computer diagnosis for polyp detection (CADe), in improving colorectal cancer outcomes, adopting a Canadian health care perspective.

A Markov model with 1-year cycles and a lifetime horizon was used to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing CADe to conventional colonoscopy polyp detection amongst patients with a positive faecal immunochemical test. Outcomes were life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. The analysis applied costs associated with health care resource utilization, including procedures and follow-ups, from a provincial payer's perspective using 2022 Canadian dollars. Effectiveness and cost data were sourced from the literature and publicly available databases. Extensive probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed, assessing model robustness.

Life years and QALY gains for the CADe and conventional colonoscopy groups were 19.144 versus 19.125 and 17.137 versus 17.113, respectively. CADe and conventional colonoscopies' overall per-case costs were $2990.74 and $3004.59, respectively. With a willingness-to-pay pre-set at $50,000/QALY, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was dominant for both outcomes, showing that CADe colonoscopy is cost-effective. Deterministic sensitivity analysis confirmed that the model was sensitive to the incidence risk ratio of adenoma per colonoscopy for large adenomas. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the CADe strategy was cost-effective in up to 73.4% of scenarios.

The addition of CADe solution to colonoscopy is a dominant, cost-effective strategy when used in faecal immunochemical test-positive patients in a Canadian health care setting.

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.

As artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted diagnosis gained immense popularity, it is imperative to consider its utility and efficiency in the early diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC), responsible for over 1.8 million cases and 881 000 deaths globally, as reported in 2018. Improved adenoma detection rate, as well as better characterizations of polyps, are significant advantages of AI-assisted colonoscopy (AIC). This systematic review (SR) investigates the effectiveness of AIC in the early diagnosis of CRC as compared to conventional colonoscopy.

Electronic databases such as PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were reviewed for original studies (randomized controlled trials, observational studies), SRs, and meta-analysis between 2017 and 2022 utilizing Medical Subject Headings terminology in a broad search strategy. All searches were performed and analyzed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis methodology and were conducted from November 2022. A data extraction form based on the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review group's extraction template for quality assessment and evidence synthesis was used for data extraction. All included studies considered for bias and ethical criteria and provided valuable evidence to answer the research question.

The database search identified 218 studies, including 87 from PubMed, 60 from SCOPUS, and 71 from Web of Science databases. The retrieved studies from the databases were imported to Rayyan software and a duplicate article check was performed, all duplicate articles were removed after careful evaluation of the data. The abstract and full-text screening was performed in accordance with the following eligibility criteria: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) for observational studies; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for review articles, ENTREQ for narrative studies; and modified JADAD for randomized controlled trials. This yielded 15 studies that met the requirements for this SR and were finally included in the review.

AIC is a safe, highly effective screening tool that can increase the detection rate of adenomas, and polyps resulting in an early diagnosis of CRC in adults when compared to conventional colonoscopy. The results of this SR prompt further large-scale research to investigate the effectiveness in accordance with sex, race, and socioeconomic status, as well as its influence on prognosis and survival rate.

The application of artificial intelligence (AI) has great promise for improving pediatric endoscopy. The majority of preclinical studies have been undertaken in adults, with the greatest progress being made in the context of colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. This development has only been possible with advances in deep learning, like the convolutional neural network model, which has enabled real-time detection of pathology. Comparatively, the majority of deep learning systems developed in inflammatory bowel disease have focused on predicting disease severity and were developed using still images rather than videos. The application of AI to pediatric endoscopy is in its infancy, thus providing an opportunity to develop clinically meaningful and fair systems that do not perpetuate societal biases. In this review, we provide an overview of AI, summarize the advances of AI in endoscopy, and describe its potential application to pediatric endoscopic practice and education.

Optical biopsy in Barrett's oesophagus (BE) using endocytoscopy (EC) could optimize endoscopic screening. However, the identification of dysplasia is challenging due to the complex interpretation of the highly detailed images. Therefore, we assessed whether using artificial intelligence (AI) as second assessor could help gastroenterologists in interpreting endocytoscopic BE images. First, we prospectively videotaped 52 BE patients with EC. Then we trained and tested the AI pm distinct datasets drawn from 83,277 frames, developed an endocytoscopic BE classification system, and designed online training and testing modules. We invited two successive cohorts for these online modules: 10 endoscopists to validate the classification system and 12 gastroenterologists to evaluate AI as second assessor by providing six of them with the option to request AI assistance. Training the endoscopists in the classification system established an improved sensitivity of 90.0% (+32.67%, p < 0.001) and an accuracy of 77.67% (+13.0%, p = 0.020) compared with the baseline. However, these values deteriorated at follow-up (-16.67%, p < 0.001 and -8.0%, p = 0.009). Contrastingly, AI-assisted gastroenterologists maintained high sensitivity and accuracy at follow-up, subsequently outperforming the unassisted gastroenterologists (+20.0%, p = 0.025 and +12.22%, p = 0.05). Thus, best diagnostic scores for the identification of dysplasia emerged through human-machine collaboration between trained gastroenterologists with AI as the second assessor. Therefore, AI could support clinical implementation of optical biopsies through EC.

Humanitarian crises are unpredictable and complex environments, in which access to basic services and infrastructures is not adequately available. Computing in a humanitarian crisis environment is different from any other environment. In humanitarian environments the accessibility to electricity, internet, and qualified human resources is usually limited. Hence, advanced computing technologies in such an environment are hard to deploy and implement. Moreover, time and resources in those environments are also limited and devoted for life-saving activities, which makes computing technologies among the lowest priorities for those who operate there. In humanitarian crises, interests and preferences of decision-makers are driven by their original languages, cultures, education, religions, and political affiliations. Hence, decision-making in such environments is usually hard and slow because it solely depends on human capacity in absence of proper computing techniques. In this research, we are interested in overcoming the above challenges by involving machines in humanitarian response. This work proposes and evaluates a text classification and embedding technique to transform historical humanitarian records from human-oriented into a machine-oriented structure (in a vector space). This technique allows machines to extract humanitarian knowledge and use it to answer questions and classify documents. Having machines involved in those tasks helps decision-makers in speeding up humanitarian response, reducing its cost, saving lives, and easing human suffering.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41018-023-00135-4.

Computer-aided detection (CADe) of colorectal polyps has been shown to increase adenoma detection rates, which would potentially shorten subsequent surveillance intervals.

The purpose of this study is to simulate the potential changes in subsequent colonoscopy surveillance intervals after the application of CADe in a large cohort of patients.

We simulated the projected increase in polyp and adenoma detection by universal CADe application in our patients who had undergone colonoscopy with complete endoscopic and histological findings between 2016 and 2020. The simulation was based on bootstrapping the published performance of CADe. The corresponding changes in surveillance intervals for each patient, as recommended by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMSTF) or the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), were determined after the CADe was determined.

A total of 3735 patients who had undergone colonoscopy were included. Based on the simulated CADe effect, the application of CADe would result in 19.1% (n=714) and 1.9% (n=71) of patients having shorter surveillance intervals, according to the USMSTF and ESGE guidelines, respectively. In particular, all (or 2.7% (n=101) of the total) patients who were originally scheduled to have 3-5 years of surveillance would have their surveillance intervals shortened to 3 years, following the USMSTF guidelines. The changes in this group of patients were largely attributed to an increase in the number of adenomas (n=75, 74%) rather than serrated lesions being detected.

Widespread adoption of CADe would inevitably increase the demand for surveillance colonoscopies with the shortening of original surveillance intervals, particularly following the current USMSTF guideline.

The number of artificial intelligence (AI) tools for colonoscopy on the market is increasing with supporting clinical evidence. Nevertheless, their implementation is not going smoothly for a variety of reasons, including lack of data on clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness, lack of trustworthy guidelines, uncertain indications, and cost for implementation. To address this issue and better guide practitioners, the World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) has provided its perspective about the status of AI in colonoscopy as the position statement. WEO Position Statement: Statement 1.1: Computer-aided detection (CADe) for colorectal polyps is likely to improve colonoscopy effectiveness by reducing adenoma miss rates and thus increase adenoma detection; Statement 1.2: In the short term, use of CADe is likely to increase health-care costs by detecting more adenomas; Statement 1.3: In the long term, the increased cost by CADe could be balanced by savings in costs related to cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, palliative care) due to CADe-related cancer prevention; Statement 1.4: Health-care delivery systems and authorities should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CADe to support its use in clinical practice; Statement 2.1: Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) for diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), when it has sufficient accuracy, is expected to reduce health-care costs by reducing polypectomies, pathological examinations, or both; Statement 2.2: Health-care delivery systems and authorities should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CADx to support its use in clinical practice; Statement 3: We recommend that a broad range of high-quality cost-effectiveness research should be undertaken to understand whether AI implementation benefits populations and societies in different health-care systems.

Colonoscopy remains the gold standard investigation for colorectal cancer screening as it offers the opportunity to both detect and resect pre-cancerous polyps. Computer-aided polyp characterisation can determine which polyps need polypectomy and recent deep learning-based approaches have shown promising results as clinical decision support tools. Yet polyp appearance during a procedure can vary, making automatic predictions unstable. In this paper, we investigate the use of spatio-temporal information to improve the performance of lesions classification as adenoma or non-adenoma. Two methods are implemented showing an increase in performance and robustness during extensive experiments both on internal and openly available benchmark datasets.

People in the life sciences who work with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) are under increased pressure to develop algorithms faster than ever. The possibility of revealing innovative insights and speeding breakthroughs lies in using large datasets integrated on several levels. However, even if there is more data at our disposal than ever, only a meager portion is being filtered, interpreted, integrated, and analyzed. The subject of this technology is the study of how computers may learn from data and imitate human mental processes. Both an increase in the learning capacity and the provision of a decision support system at a size that is redefining the future of healthcare are enabled by AI and ML. This article offers a survey of the uses of AI and ML in the healthcare industry, with a particular emphasis on clinical, developmental, administrative, and global health implementations to support the healthcare infrastructure as a whole, along with the impact and expectations of each component of healthcare. Additionally, possible future trends and scopes of the utilization of this technology in medical infrastructure have also been discussed.

Optical diagnosis of colonic polyps is poorly reproducible outside of high volume referral centers. The present study aimed to assess whether real-time artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted optical diagnosis is accurate enough to implement the leave-in-situ strategy for diminutive (≤ 5 mm) rectosigmoid polyps (DRSPs).

Consecutive colonoscopy outpatients with ≥ 1 DRSP were included. DRSPs were categorized as adenomas or nonadenomas by the endoscopists, who had differing expertise in optical diagnosis, with the assistance of a real-time AI system (CAD-EYE). The primary end point was ≥ 90 % negative predictive value (NPV) for adenomatous histology in high confidence AI-assisted optical diagnosis of DRSPs (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable endoscopic Innovations [PIVI-1] threshold), with histopathology as the reference standard. The agreement between optical- and histology-based post-polypectomy surveillance intervals (≥ 90 %; PIVI-2 threshold) was also calculated according to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United States Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) guidelines.

Overall 596 DRSPs were retrieved for histology in 389 patients; an AI-assisted high confidence optical diagnosis was made in 92.3 %. The NPV of AI-assisted optical diagnosis for DRSPs (PIVI-1) was 91.0 % (95 %CI 87.1 %-93.9 %). The PIVI-2 threshold was met with 97.4 % (95 %CI 95.7 %-98.9 %) and 92.6 % (95 %CI 90.0 %-95.2 %) of patients according to ESGE and USMSTF, respectively. AI-assisted optical diagnosis accuracy was significantly lower for nonexperts (82.3 %, 95 %CI 76.4 %-87.3 %) than for experts (91.9 %, 95 %CI 88.5 %-94.5 %); however, nonexperts quickly approached the performance levels of experts over time.

AI-assisted optical diagnosis matches the required PIVI thresholds. This does not however offset the need for endoscopists' high level confidence and expertise. The AI system seems to be useful, especially for nonexperts.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is gradually being utilized in various fields as its performance has been improving with the development of deep learning methods, availability of big data, and the progression of computer processing units. In the field of medicine, AI is mainly implemented in image recognition, such as in radiographic and pathologic diagnoses. In the realm of gastrointestinal endoscopy, although AI-based computer-assisted detection/diagnosis (CAD) systems have been applied in some areas, such as colorectal polyp detection and diagnosis, so far, their implementation in real-world clinical settings is limited. The accurate detection or diagnosis of gastric cancer (GC) is one of the challenges in which performance varies greatly depending on the endoscopist's skill. The diagnosis of early GC is especially challenging, partly because early GC mimics atrophic gastritis in the background mucosa. Therefore, several CAD systems for GC are being actively developed. The development of a CAD system for GC is considered challenging because it requires a large number of GC images. In particular, early stage GC images are rarely available, partly because it is difficult to diagnose gastric cancer during the early stages. Additionally, the training image data should be of a sufficiently high quality to conduct proper CAD training. Recently, several AI systems for GC that exhibit a robust performance, owing to being trained on a large number of high-quality images, have been reported. This review outlines the current status and prospects of AI use in esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGDS), focusing on the diagnosis of GC.

This ESGE Position Statement defines the expected value of artificial intelligence (AI) for the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal neoplasia within the framework of the performance measures already defined by ESGE. This is based on the clinical relevance of the expected task and the preliminary evidence regarding artificial intelligence in artificial or clinical settings. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS:: (1) For acceptance of AI in assessment of completeness of upper GI endoscopy, the adequate level of mucosal inspection with AI should be comparable to that assessed by experienced endoscopists. (2) For acceptance of AI in assessment of completeness of upper GI endoscopy, automated recognition and photodocumentation of relevant anatomical landmarks should be obtained in ≥90% of the procedures. (3) For acceptance of AI in the detection of Barrett's high grade intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer, the AI-assisted detection rate for suspicious lesions for targeted biopsies should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists with or without advanced imaging techniques. (4) For acceptance of AI in the management of Barrett's neoplasia, AI-assisted selection of lesions amenable to endoscopic resection should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists. (5) For acceptance of AI in the diagnosis of gastric precancerous conditions, AI-assisted diagnosis of atrophy and intestinal metaplasia should be comparable to that provided by the established biopsy protocol, including the estimation of extent, and consequent allocation to the correct endoscopic surveillance interval. (6) For acceptance of artificial intelligence for automated lesion detection in small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), the performance of AI-assisted reading should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists for lesion detection, without increasing but possibly reducing the reading time of the operator. (7) For acceptance of AI in the detection of colorectal polyps, the AI-assisted adenoma detection rate should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists. (8) For acceptance of AI optical diagnosis (computer-aided diagnosis [CADx]) of diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), AI-assisted characterization should match performance standards for implementing resect-and-discard and diagnose-and-leave strategies. (9) For acceptance of AI in the management of polyps ≥ 6 mm, AI-assisted characterization should be comparable to that of experienced endoscopists in selecting lesions amenable to endoscopic resection.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) could support cost-saving strategies for colonoscopy because of its accuracy in the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps. However, AI must meet predefined criteria to be implemented in clinical settings.

An approved computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) module for differentiating between adenoma and nonadenoma in unmagnified white-light colonoscopy was used in a consecutive series of colonoscopies. For each polyp, CADx output and subsequent endoscopist diagnosis with advanced imaging were matched against the histology gold standard. The primary outcome was the negative predictive value (NPV) of CADx for adenomatous histology for ≤5-mm rectosigmoid lesions. We also calculated the NPV for AI-assisted endoscopist predictions, and agreement between CADx and histology-based postpolypectomy surveillance intervals according to European and American guidelines.

Overall, 544 polyps were removed in 162 patients, of which 295 (54.2%) were ≤5-mm rectosigmoid histologically verified lesions. CADx diagnosis was feasible in 291 of 295 (98.6%), and the NPV for ≤5-mm rectosigmoid lesions was 97.6% (95% CI, 94.1%-99.1%). There were 242 of 295 (82%) lesions that were amenable for a leave-in-situ strategy. Based on CADx output, 212 of 544 (39%) would be amenable to a resect-and-discard strategy, resulting in a 95.6% (95% CI, 90.8%-98.0%) and 95.9% (95% CI, 89.8%-98.4%) agreement between CADx- and histology-based surveillance intervals according to European and American guidelines, respectively. A similar NPV (97.6%; 95% CI, 94.8%-99.1%) for ≤5-mm rectosigmoids was achieved by AI-assisted endoscopists assessing polyps with electronic chromoendoscopy, with a CADx-concordant diagnosis in 97.2% of cases.

In this study, CADx without advanced imaging exceeded the benchmarks required for optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps. CADx could help implement cost-saving strategies in colonoscopy by reducing the burden of polypectomy and/or pathology.

gov registration number: NCT04884581.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are common subepithelial lesions (SELs) and require treatment considering their malignant potential. We recently developed an endoscopic ultrasound-based artificial intelligence (EUS-AI) system to differentiate GISTs from non-GISTs in gastric SELs, which were used to train the system. We assessed whether the EUS-AI system designed for diagnosing gastric GISTs could be applied to non-gastric GISTs. Between January 2015 and January 2021, 52 patients with non-gastric SELs (esophagus, n = 15; duodenum, n = 26; colon, n = 11) were enrolled. The ability of EUS-AI to differentiate GISTs from non-GISTs in non-gastric SELs was examined. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of EUS-AI for discriminating GISTs from non-GISTs in non-gastric SELs were 94.4%, 100%, and 86.1%, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.98 based on the cutoff value set using the Youden index. In the subanalysis, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of EUS-AI were highest in the esophagus (100%, 100%, 100%; duodenum, 96.2%, 100%, 0%; colon, 90.9%, 100%, 0%); the cutoff values were determined using the Youden index or the value determined using stomach cases. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-AI increased as lesion size increased, regardless of lesion location. EUS-AI based on gastric SELs had good diagnostic ability for non-gastric GISTs.