Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35328166›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Use of U-Net Convolutional Neural Networks for Automated Segmentation of Fecal Material for Objective Evaluation of Bowel Preparation Quality in Colonoscopy.

Yen-Po Wang, Ying-Chun Jheng, Kuang-Yi Sung, Hung-En Lin, I-Fang Hsin, Ping-Hsien Chen, Yuan-Chia Chu, David Lu, Yuan-Jen Wang, Ming-Chih Hou and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: from detection to diagnosis.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Yen-Po WangEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-3769-0020
Ying-Chun JhengEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Kuang-Yi SungEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-1100-6152
Hung-En LinEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
I-Fang HsinEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Ping-Hsien ChenEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Yuan-Chia ChuInformation Management Office, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-0997-5168
David LuEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Yuan-Jen WangFaculty of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University School of Medicine, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Ming-Chih HouEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Fa-Yauh LeeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.
Ching-Liang LuEndoscopy Center for Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan.

Funding

Taipei Veterans General Hospital V108B-020, V109B-041, V1083-004-4, V109E-002-5, V110E-002-3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Adequate bowel cleansing is important for colonoscopy performance evaluation. Current bowel cleansing evaluation scales are subjective, with a wide variation in consistency among physicians and low reported rates of accuracy. We aim to use machine learning to develop a fully automatic segmentation method for the objective evaluation of the adequacy of colon preparation. Methods: Colonoscopy videos were retrieved from a video data cohort and transferred to qualified images, which were randomly divided into training, validation, and verification datasets. The fecal residue was manually segmented. A deep learning model based on the U-Net convolutional network architecture was developed to perform automatic segmentation. The performance of the automatic segmentation was evaluated on the overlap area with the manual segmentation. Results: A total of 10,118 qualified images from 119 videos were obtained. The model averaged 0.3634 s to segmentate one image automatically. The models produced a strong high-overlap area with manual segmentation, with 94.7% ± 0.67% of that area predicted by our AI model, which correlated well with the area measured manually (r = 0.915, p < 0.001). The AI system can be applied in real-time qualitatively and quantitatively. Conclusions: We established a fully automatic segmentation method to rapidly and accurately mark the fecal residue-coated mucosa for the objective evaluation of colon preparation.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceautomated segmentationcolonoscopycolonoscopy preparation qualityU-NET

Identifiers

PMID35328166
PMCPMC8947406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.