학술논문
Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial.
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Lau LHS; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Ho JCL; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Lai JCT; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Ho AHY; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Wu CWK; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Lo VWH; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Lai CMS; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Scheppach MW; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.; Sia F; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Ho KHK; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Xiao X; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Medical Data Analytic Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Yip TCF; Medical Data Analytic Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Lam TYT; Stanley Ho Big Data Decision Analytics Research Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Kwok HYH; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Chan HCH; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Lui RN; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Chan TT; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Wong MTL; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Ho MF; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Ko RCW; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Hon SF; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Chu S; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Futaba K; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Ng SSM; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Yip HC; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Tang RSY; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Wong VWS; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Chan FKL; Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.; Chiu PWY; Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR. Electronic address: philipchiu@surgery.cuhk.edu.hk.
Source
Publisher: W.B. Saunders for the American Gastroenterological Association Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101160775 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1542-7714 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 15423565 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Subsets: MEDLINE
Subject
Language
English
Abstract
Background: The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown.
Methods: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate.
Results: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group.
Conclusions: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).
(Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Methods: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate.
Results: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group.
Conclusions: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).
(Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)