Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36527309›Full record

ArticleDigestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society2023

Polyp characterization using deep learning and a publicly accessible polyp video database.

Rawen Kader, Anton Cid-Mejias, Patrick Brandao, Shahraz Islam, Sanjith Hebbar, Juana González-Bueno Puyal, Omer F Ahmad, Mohamed Hussein, Daniel Toth, Peter Mountney and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Rawen KaderWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9133-0838
Anton Cid-MejiasOdin Vision Ltd, London, UK.
Patrick BrandaoOdin Vision Ltd, London, UK.
Shahraz IslamWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Sanjith HebbarOdin Vision Ltd, London, UK.
Juana González-Bueno PuyalWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Omer F AhmadWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Mohamed HusseinWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Daniel TothOdin Vision Ltd, London, UK.
Peter MountneyOdin Vision Ltd, London, UK.
Ed SewardDivision of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Roser VegaDivision of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Danail StoyanovWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Laurence B LovatWellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 203145Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesConvolutional neural networks (CNN) for computer-aided diagnosis of polyps are often trained using high-quality still images in a single chromoendoscopy imaging modality with sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) often excluded. This study developed a CNN from videos to classify polyps as adenomatous or nonadenomatous using standard narrow-band imaging (NBI) and NBI-near focus (NBI-NF) and created a publicly accessible polyp video database.

methodsWe trained a CNN with 16,832 high and moderate quality frames from 229 polyp videos (56 SSLs). It was evaluated with 222 polyp videos (36 SSLs) across two test-sets. Test-set I consists of 14,320 frames (157 polyps, 111 diminutive). Test-set II, which is publicly accessible, 3317 video frames (65 polyps, 41 diminutive), which was benchmarked with three expert and three nonexpert endoscopists.

resultsSensitivity for adenoma characterization was 91.6% in test-set I and 89.7% in test-set II. Specificity was 91.9% and 88.5%. Sensitivity for diminutive polyps was 89.9% and 87.5%; specificity 90.5% and 88.2%. In NBI-NF, sensitivity was 89.4% and 89.5%, with a specificity of 94.7% and 83.3%. In NBI, sensitivity was 85.3% and 91.7%, with a specificity of 87.5% and 90.0%, respectively. The CNN achieved preservation and incorporation of valuable endoscopic innovations (PIVI)-1 and PIVI-2 thresholds for each test-set. In the benchmarking of test-set II, the CNN was significantly more accurate than nonexperts (13.8% difference [95% confidence interval 3.2-23.6], P = 0.01) with no significant difference with experts.

conclusionsA single CNN can differentiate adenomas from SSLs and hyperplastic polyps in both NBI and NBI-NF. A publicly accessible NBI polyp video database was created and benchmarked.

Indexed as

AdenomaColonic PolypsColorectal NeoplasmsDeep LearningColonoscopyHumansNarrow Band Imagingartificial intelligencecolonic polypcolonoscopycolorectal neoplasmdeep learning

Identifiers

PMID36527309
PMCPMC10570984

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.