Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2025
Evaluation efficacy and accuracy of a real-time computer-aided polyp detection system during colonoscopy: a prospective, multicentric, randomized, parallel-controlled study trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence-based computer-aided detection systems for adenomas during colonoscopy: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- Advances in Artificial Intelligence for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: 2026 Update.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionColorectal cancer (CRC) ranks as the second deadliest cancer globally, impacting patients' quality of life. Colonoscopy is the primary screening method for detecting adenomas and polyps, crucial for reducing long-term CRC risk, but it misses about 30% of cases. Efforts to improve detection rates include using AI to enhance colonoscopy. This study assesses the effectiveness and accuracy of a real-time AI-assisted polyp detection system during colonoscopy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 390 patients aged 40 to 75 undergoing colonoscopies for either colorectal cancer screening (risk score ≥ 4) or clinical diagnosis. Participants were randomly assigned to an experimental group using software-assisted diagnosis or a control group with physician diagnosis. The software, a medical image processing tool with B/S and MVC architecture, operates on Windows 10 (64-bit) and supports real-time image handling and lesion identification via HDMI, SDI, AV, and DVI outputs from endoscopy devices. Expert evaluations of retrospective video lesions served as the gold standard. Efficacy was assessed by polyp per colonoscopy (PPC), adenoma per colonoscopy (APC), adenoma detection rate (ADR), and polyp detection rate (PDR), while accuracy was measured using sensitivity and specificity against the gold standard.
resultsIn this multicenter, randomized controlled trial, computer-aided detection (CADe) significantly improved polyp detection rates (PDR), achieving 67.18% in the CADe group versus 56.92% in the control group. The CADe group identified more polyps, especially those 5 mm or smaller (61.03% vs. 56.92%). In addition, the CADe group demonstrated higher specificity (98.44%) and sensitivity (95.19%) in the FAS dataset, and improved sensitivity (95.82% vs. 77.53%) in the PPS dataset, with both groups maintaining 100% specificity. These results suggest that the AI-assisted system enhances PDR accuracy.
conclusionThis real-time computer-aided polyp detection system enhances efficacy by boosting adenoma and polyp detection rates, while also achieving high accuracy with excellent sensitivity and specificity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.