-
Review Meta Analysis
Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia During Colonoscopy : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
- Cesare Hassan, Marco Spadaccini, Yuichi Mori, Farid Foroutan, Antonio Facciorusso, Paraskevas Gkolfakis, Georgios Tziatzios, Konstantinos Triantafyllou, Giulio Antonelli, Kareem Khalaf, Tommy Rizkala, Per Olav Vandvik, Alessandro Fugazza, Emanuele Rondonotti, Jeremy R Glissen-Brown, Shunsuke Kamba, Marcello Maida, Loredana Correale, Pradeep Bhandari, Rodrigo Jover, Prateek Sharma, Douglas K Rex, and Alessandro Repici.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, and Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Rozzano, Italy (C.H., M.S., A.R.).
- Ann. Intern. Med. 2023 Sep 1; 176 (9): 120912201209-1220.
BackgroundArtificial intelligence computer-aided detection (CADe) of colorectal neoplasia during colonoscopy may increase adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and reduce adenoma miss rates, but it may increase overdiagnosis and overtreatment of nonneoplastic polyps.PurposeTo quantify the benefits and harms of CADe in randomized trials.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis. (PROSPERO: CRD42022293181).Data SourcesMedline, Embase, and Scopus databases through February 2023.Study SelectionRandomized trials comparing CADe-assisted with standard colonoscopy for polyp and cancer detection.Data ExtractionAdenoma detection rate (proportion of patients with ≥1 adenoma), number of adenomas detected per colonoscopy, advanced adenoma (≥10 mm with high-grade dysplasia and villous histology), number of serrated lesions per colonoscopy, and adenoma miss rate were extracted as benefit outcomes. Number of polypectomies for nonneoplastic lesions and withdrawal time were extracted as harm outcomes. For each outcome, studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework.Data SynthesisTwenty-one randomized trials on 18 232 patients were included. The ADR was higher in the CADe group than in the standard colonoscopy group (44.0% vs. 35.9%; relative risk, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.33]; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to a 55% (risk ratio, 0.45 [CI, 0.35 to 0.58]) relative reduction in miss rate (moderate-certainty evidence). More nonneoplastic polyps were removed in the CADe than the standard group (0.52 vs. 0.34 per colonoscopy; mean difference [MD], 0.18 polypectomy [CI, 0.11 to 0.26 polypectomy]; low-certainty evidence). Mean inspection time increased only marginally with CADe (MD, 0.47 minute [CI, 0.23 to 0.72 minute]; moderate-certainty evidence).LimitationsThis review focused on surrogates of patient-important outcomes. Most patients, however, may consider cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality important outcomes. The effect of CADe on such patient-important outcomes remains unclear.ConclusionThe use of CADe for polyp detection during colonoscopy results in increased detection of adenomas but not advanced adenomas and in higher rates of unnecessary removal of nonneoplastic polyps.Primary Funding SourceEuropean Commission Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.