ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Effect of Helicobacter pylori infection on deep learning-assisted detection of gastric neoplastic lesions under white light endoscopy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI)-assisted endoscopy facilitates upper gastrointestinal lesion detection. Whether Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection influences its diagnostic performance remains unclear. This study evaluated the effect of H. pylori infection on an AI model's accuracy for diagnosing gastric neoplasms.
methodsA deep convolutional neural network-based AI system was evaluated for gastric neoplasm detection (low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN), high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN), and early gastric cancer (EGC)) in a retrospective cohort study. White light endoscopy (WLE) images (n = 2347) were collected from 563 patients who underwent imaging from November 2019 to August 2024 at Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province to assess H. pylori infection's impact on diagnostic performance. Additional WLE images (n = 447) from 117 patients (September 2024-June 2025) were used to compare the AI system's performance with that of expert and non-expert endoscopists.
resultsThe AI system achieved 85.0% accuracy, 82.0% sensitivity, 87.6% specificity, 85.2% positive predictive value (PPV), and 84.8% negative predictive value (NPV). The accuracy (87.1% vs. 80.2%), specificity (89.9% vs. 76.6%), and NPV (89.7% vs. 65.4%) were significantly higher in the H. pylori-negative group than in the H. pylori-positive group (all P < 0.001), whereas the PPV was lower (82.7% vs. 88.5%, P = 0.008), with a comparable sensitivity (82.3% vs. 81.6%, P = 0.790). Within the H. pylori-negative cohort, further stratification into never-infected and eradicated subgroups showed that the eradicated group had significantly higher accuracy, sensitivity, and NPV than the H. pylori-positive group (all P < 0.05). It exhibited significantly higher accuracy for detecting non-neoplastic lesions and LGIN in the H. pylori-negative group (P < 0.05), but not for HGIN or EGC (P > 0.05). Its diagnostic accuracy was comparable to the expert endoscopists' (84.8% vs. 81.9%, P = 0.247) and significantly higher than the non-expert endoscopists' (84.8% vs. 72.1%, P < 0.001).
conclusionThis AI system exhibited excellent performance for gastric neoplasm detection, which was significantly affected by H. pylori infection (particularly for non-neoplastic lesions and LGIN). Eradication of H. pylori appeared to restore the diagnostic performance of the AI system. Its diagnostic accuracy in still image classification was comparable to expert endoscopists and superior to non-experts, supporting its potential as an adjunctive clinical endoscopy tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41535450What 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.