@article{MeinikheimMendelPalmetal.2024, author = {Meinikheim, Michael and Mendel, Robert and Palm, Christoph and Probst, Andreas and Muzalyova, Anna and Scheppach, Markus Wolfgang and Nagl, Sandra and Schnoy, Elisabeth and R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Schulz, Dominik Andreas Helmut Otto and Schlottmann, Jakob and Prinz, Friederike and Rauber, David and R{\"u}ckert, Tobias and Matsumura, Tomoaki and Fern{\´a}ndez-Esparrach, Gl{\`o}ria and Parsa, Nasim and Byrne, Michael F and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {Effect of AI on performance of endoscopists to detect Barrett neoplasia: A Randomized Tandem Trial}, series = {Endoscopy}, journal = {Endoscopy}, publisher = {Georg Thieme Verlag}, issn = {0013-726X}, doi = {10.1055/a-2296-5696}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Background and study aims To evaluate the effect of an AI-based clinical decision support system (AI) on the performance and diagnostic confidence of endoscopists during the assessment of Barrett's esophagus (BE). Patients and Methods Ninety-six standardized endoscopy videos were assessed by 22 endoscopists from 12 different centers with varying degrees of BE experience. The assessment was randomized into two video sets: Group A (review first without AI and second with AI) and group B (review first with AI and second without AI). Endoscopists were required to evaluate each video for the presence of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) and then decide on a spot for a targeted biopsy. After the second assessment, they were allowed to change their clinical decision and confidence level. Results AI had a standalone sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92.2\%, 68.9\%, and 81.6\%, respectively. Without AI, BE experts had an overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.3\%, 58.1 and 71.5\%, respectively. With AI, BE nonexperts showed a significant improvement in sensitivity and specificity when videos were assessed a second time with AI (sensitivity 69.7\% (95\% CI, 65.2\% - 74.2\%) to 78.0\% (95\% CI, 74.0\% - 82.0\%); specificity 67.3\% (95\% CI, 62.5\% - 72.2\%) to 72.7\% (95 CI, 68.2\% - 77.3\%). In addition, the diagnostic confidence of BE nonexperts improved significantly with AI. Conclusion BE nonexperts benefitted significantly from the additional AI. BE experts and nonexperts remained below the standalone performance of AI, suggesting that there may be other factors influencing endoscopists to follow or discard AI advice.}, language = {en} } @misc{MeinikheimMendelProbstetal., author = {Meinikheim, Michael and Mendel, Robert and Probst, Andreas and Scheppach, Markus W. and Nagl, Sandra and Schnoy, Elisabeth and R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Prinz, Friederike and Schlottmann, Jakob and Messmann, Helmut and Palm, Christoph and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {Einfluss von K{\"u}nstlicher Intelligenz auf die Performance von niedergelassenen Gastroenterolog:innen bei der Beurteilung von Barrett-{\"O}sophagus}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gastroenterologie}, volume = {61}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gastroenterologie}, number = {8}, publisher = {Thieme}, address = {Stuttgart}, doi = {10.1055/s-0043-1771711}, abstract = {Einleitung Die Differenzierung zwischen nicht dysplastischem Barrett-{\"O}sophagus (NDBE) und mit Barrett-{\"O}sophagus assoziierten Neoplasien (BERN) w{\"a}hrend der endoskopischen Inspektion erfordert viel Expertise. Die fr{\"u}he Diagnosestellung ist wichtig f{\"u}r die weitere Prognose des Barrett-Karzinoms. In Deutschland werden Patient:innen mit einem Barrett-{\"O}sophagus (BE) in der Regel im niedergelassenen Sektor {\"u}berwacht. Ziele Ziel ist es, den Einfluss von einem auf K{\"u}nstlicher Intelligenz (KI) basierenden klinischen Entscheidungsunterst{\"u}tzungssystems (CDSS) auf die Performance von niedergelassenen Gastroenterolog:innen (NG) bei der Evaluation von Barrett-{\"O}sophagus (BE) zu untersuchen. Methodik Es erfolgte die prospektive Sammlung von 96 unver{\"a}nderten hochaufl{\"o}senden Videos mit F{\"a}llen von Patient:innen mit histologisch best{\"a}tigtem NDBE und BERN. Alle eingeschlossenen F{\"a}lle enthielten mindestens zwei der folgenden Darstellungsmethoden: HD-Weißlichtendoskopie, Narrow Band Imaging oder Texture and Color Enhancement Imaging. Sechs NG von sechs unterschiedlichen Praxen wurden als Proband:innen eingeschlossen. Es erfolgte eine permutierte Block-Randomisierung der Videof{\"a}lle in entweder Gruppe A oder Gruppe B. Gruppe A implizierte eine Evaluation des Falls durch Proband:innen zun{\"a}chst ohne KI und anschließend mit KI als CDSS. In Gruppe B erfolgte die Evaluation in umgekehrter Reihenfolge. Anschließend erfolgte eine zuf{\"a}llige Wiedergabe der so entstandenen Subgruppen im Rahmen des Tests. Ergebnis In diesem Test konnte ein von uns entwickeltes KI-System (Barrett-Ampel) eine Sensitivit{\"a}t von 92,2\%, eine Spezifit{\"a}t von 68,9\% und eine Accuracy von 81,3\% erreichen. Mit der Hilfe von KI verbesserte sich die Sensitivit{\"a}t der NG von 64,1\% auf 71,2\% (p<0,001) und die Accuracy von 66,3\% auf 70,8\% (p=0,006) signifikant. Eine signifikante Verbesserung dieser Parameter zeigte sich ebenfalls, wenn die Proband:innen die F{\"a}lle zun{\"a}chst ohne KI evaluierten (Gruppe A). Wurde der Fall jedoch als Erstes mit der Hilfe von KI evaluiert (Gruppe B), blieb die Performance nahezu konstant. Schlussfolgerung Es konnte ein performantes KI-System zur Evaluation von BE entwickelt werden. NG verbessern sich bei der Evaluation von BE durch den Einsatz von KI.}, language = {de} } @misc{MeinikheimMendelProbstetal., author = {Meinikheim, Michael and Mendel, Robert and Probst, Andreas and Scheppach, Markus W. and Schnoy, Elisabeth and Nagl, Sandra and R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Prinz, Friederike and Schlottmann, Jakob and Golger, Daniela and Palm, Christoph and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {AI-assisted detection and characterization of early Barrett's neoplasia: Results of an Interim analysis}, series = {Endoscopy}, volume = {55}, journal = {Endoscopy}, number = {S02}, publisher = {Thieme}, doi = {10.1055/s-0043-1765437}, pages = {S169}, abstract = {Aims Evaluation of the add-on effect an artificial intelligence (AI) based clinical decision support system has on the performance of endoscopists with different degrees of expertise in the field of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN). Methods The support system is based on a multi-task deep learning model trained to solve a segmentation and several classification tasks. The training approach represents an extension of the ECMT semi-supervised learning algorithm. The complete system evaluates a decision tree between estimated motion, classification, segmentation, and temporal constraints, to decide when and how the prediction is highlighted to the observer. In our current study, ninety-six video cases of patients with BE and BERN were prospectively collected and assessed by Barrett's specialists and non-specialists. All video cases were evaluated twice - with and without AI assistance. The order of appearance, either with or without AI support, was assigned randomly. Participants were asked to detect and characterize regions of dysplasia or early neoplasia within the video sequences. Results Standalone sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the AI system were 92.16\%, 68.89\%, and 81.25\%, respectively. Mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of expert endoscopists without AI support were 83,33\%, 58,20\%, and 71,48 \%, respectively. Gastroenterologists without Barrett's expertise but with AI support had a comparable performance with a mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 76,63\%, 65,35\%, and 71,36\%, respectively. Conclusions Non-Barrett's experts with AI support had a similar performance as experts in a video-based study.}, language = {en} } @misc{MeinikheimMendelScheppachetal., author = {Meinikheim, Michael and Mendel, Robert and Scheppach, Markus W. and Probst, Andreas and Prinz, Friederike and Schwamberger, Tanja and Schlottmann, Jakob and G{\"o}lder, Stefan Karl and Walter, Benjamin and Steinbr{\"u}ck, Ingo and Palm, Christoph and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {INFLUENCE OF AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) BASED DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM (DSS) ON THE DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE OF NON-EXPERTS IN BARRETT´S ESOPHAGUS RELATED NEOPLASIA (BERN)}, series = {Endoscopy}, volume = {54}, journal = {Endoscopy}, number = {S 01}, publisher = {Thieme}, doi = {10.1055/s-00000012}, pages = {S39}, abstract = {Aims Barrett´s esophagus related neoplasia (BERN) is difficult to detect and characterize during endoscopy, even for expert endoscopists. We aimed to assess the add-on effect of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithm (Barrett-Ampel) as a decision support system (DSS) for non-expert endoscopists in the evaluation of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and BERN. Methods Twelve videos with multimodal imaging white light (WL), narrow-band imaging (NBI), texture and color enhanced imaging (TXI) of histologically confirmed BE and BERN were assessed by expert and non-expert endoscopists. For each video, endoscopists were asked to identify the area of BERN and decide on the biopsy spot. Videos were assessed by the AI algorithm and regions of BERN were highlighted in real-time by a transparent overlay. Finally, endoscopists were shown the AI videos and asked to either confirm or change their initial decision based on the AI support. Results Barrett-Ampel correctly identified all areas of BERN, irrespective of the imaging modality (WL, NBI, TXI), but misinterpreted two inflammatory lesions (Accuracy=75\%). Expert endoscopists had a similar performance (Accuracy=70,8\%), while non-experts had an accuracy of 58.3\%. When AI was implemented as a DSS, non-expert endoscopists improved their diagnostic accuracy to 75\%. Conclusions AI may have the potential to support non-expert endoscopists in the assessment of videos of BE and BERN. Limitations of this study include the low number of videos used. Randomized clinical trials in a real-life setting should be performed to confirm these results.}, subject = {Speiser{\"o}hrenkrankheit}, language = {en} } @misc{MeinikheimMendelScheppachetal., author = {Meinikheim, Michael and Mendel, Robert and Scheppach, Markus W. and Probst, Andreas and Prinz, Friederike and Schwamberger, Tanja and Schlottmann, Jakob and G{\"o}lder, Stefan Karl and Walter, Benjamin and Steinbr{\"u}ck, Ingo and Palm, Christoph and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {Einsatz von k{\"u}nstlicher Intelligenz (KI) als Entscheidungsunterst{\"u}tzungssystem f{\"u}r nicht-Experten bei der Beurteilung von Barrett-{\"O}sophagus assoziierten Neoplasien (BERN)}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gastroenterologie}, volume = {60}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gastroenterologie}, number = {4}, publisher = {Thieme}, address = {Stuttgart}, doi = {10.1055/s-0042-1745653}, pages = {251}, abstract = {Einleitung Die sichere Detektion und Charakterisierung von Barrett-{\"O}sophagus assoziierten Neoplasien (BERN) stellt selbst f{\"u}r erfahrene Endoskopiker eine Herausforderung dar. Ziel Ziel dieser Studie ist es, den Add-on Effekt eines k{\"u}nstlichen Intelligenz (KI) Systems (Barrett-Ampel) als Entscheidungsunterst{\"u}zungssystem f{\"u}r Endoskopiker ohne Expertise bei der Untersuchung von BERN zu evaluieren. Material und Methodik Zw{\"o}lf Videos in „Weißlicht" (WL), „narrow-band imaging" (NBI) und „texture and color enhanced imaging" (TXI) von histologisch best{\"a}tigten Barrett-Metaplasien oder BERN wurden von Experten und Untersuchern ohne Barrett-Expertise evaluiert. Die Probanden wurden dazu aufgefordert in den Videos auftauchende BERN zu identifizieren und gegebenenfalls die optimale Biopsiestelle zu markieren. Unser KI-System wurde demselben Test unterzogen, wobei dieses BERN in Echtzeit segmentierte und farblich von umliegendem Epithel differenzierte. Anschließend wurden den Probanden die Videos mit zus{\"a}tzlicher KI-Unterst{\"u}tzung gezeigt. Basierend auf dieser neuen Information, wurden die Probanden zu einer Reevaluation ihrer initialen Beurteilung aufgefordert. Ergebnisse Die „Barrett-Ampel" identifizierte unabh{\"a}ngig von den verwendeten Darstellungsmodi (WL, NBI, TXI) alle BERN. Zwei entz{\"u}ndlich ver{\"a}nderte L{\"a}sionen wurden fehlinterpretiert (Genauigkeit=75\%). W{\"a}hrend Experten vergleichbare Ergebnisse erzielten (Genauigkeit=70,8\%), hatten Endoskopiker ohne Expertise bei der Beurteilung von Barrett-Metaplasien eine Genauigkeit von lediglich 58,3\%. Wurden die nicht-Experten allerdings von unserem KI-System unterst{\"u}tzt, erreichten diese eine Genauigkeit von 75\%. Zusammenfassung Unser KI-System hat das Potential als Entscheidungsunterst{\"u}tzungssystem bei der Differenzierung zwischen Barrett-Metaplasie und BERN zu fungieren und so Endoskopiker ohne entsprechende Expertise zu assistieren. Eine Limitation dieser Studie ist die niedrige Anzahl an eingeschlossenen Videos. Um die Ergebnisse dieser Studie zu best{\"a}tigen, m{\"u}ssen randomisierte kontrollierte klinische Studien durchgef{\"u}hrt werden.}, language = {de} } @misc{RoserMeinikheimMendeletal., author = {Roser, D. A. and Meinikheim, Michael and Mendel, Robert and Palm, Christoph and Probst, Andreas and Muzalyova, A. and Scheppach, Markus W. and Nagl, S. and Schnoy, Elisabeth and R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Schulz, D. and Schlottmann, Jakob and Prinz, Friederike and Rauber, David and R{\"u}ckert, Tobias and Matsumura, T. and Fernandez-Esparrach, G. and Parsa, N. and Byrne, M. and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {Human-Computer Interaction: Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the diagnostic confidence of endoscopists assessing videos of Barrett's esophagus}, series = {Endoscopy}, volume = {56}, journal = {Endoscopy}, number = {S 02}, publisher = {Georg Thieme Verlag}, issn = {1438-8812}, doi = {10.1055/s-0044-1782859}, pages = {79}, abstract = {Aims Human-computer interactions (HCI) may have a relevant impact on the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Studies show that although endoscopists assessing Barrett's esophagus (BE) with AI improve their performance significantly, they do not achieve the level of the stand-alone performance of AI. One aspect of HCI is the impact of AI on the degree of certainty and confidence displayed by the endoscopist. Indirectly, diagnostic confidence when using AI may be linked to trust and acceptance of AI. In a BE video study, we aimed to understand the impact of AI on the diagnostic confidence of endoscopists and the possible correlation with diagnostic performance. Methods 22 endoscopists from 12 centers with varying levels of BE experience reviewed ninety-six standardized endoscopy videos. Endoscopists were categorized into experts and non-experts and randomly assigned to assess the videos with and without AI. Participants were randomized in two arms: Arm A assessed videos first without AI and then with AI, while Arm B assessed videos in the opposite order. Evaluators were tasked with identifying BE-related neoplasia and rating their confidence with and without AI on a scale from 0 to 9. Results The utilization of AI in Arm A (without AI first, with AI second) significantly elevated confidence levels for experts and non-experts (7.1 to 8.0 and 6.1 to 6.6, respectively). Only non-experts benefitted from AI with a significant increase in accuracy (68.6\% to 75.5\%). Interestingly, while the confidence levels of experts without AI were higher than those of non-experts with AI, there was no significant difference in accuracy between these two groups (71.3\% vs. 75.5\%). In Arm B (with AI first, without AI second), experts and non-experts experienced a significant reduction in confidence (7.6 to 7.1 and 6.4 to 6.2, respectively), while maintaining consistent accuracy levels (71.8\% to 71.8\% and 67.5\% to 67.1\%, respectively). Conclusions AI significantly enhanced confidence levels for both expert and non-expert endoscopists. Endoscopists felt significantly more uncertain in their assessments without AI. Furthermore, experts with or without AI consistently displayed higher confidence levels than non-experts with AI, irrespective of comparable outcomes. These findings underscore the possible role of AI in improving diagnostic confidence during endoscopic assessment.}, language = {en} } @article{RoemmeleMendelBarrettetal., author = {R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Mendel, Robert and Barrett, Caroline and Kiesl, Hans and Rauber, David and R{\"u}ckert, Tobias and Kraus, Lisa and Heinkele, Jakob and Dhillon, Christine and Grosser, Bianca and Prinz, Friederike and Wanzl, Julia and Fleischmann, Carola and Nagl, Sandra and Schnoy, Elisabeth and Schlottmann, Jakob and Dellon, Evan S. and Messmann, Helmut and Palm, Christoph and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {An artificial intelligence algorithm is highly accurate for detecting endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis}, series = {Scientific Reports}, volume = {12}, journal = {Scientific Reports}, publisher = {Nature Portfolio}, address = {London}, doi = {10.1038/s41598-022-14605-z}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:898-opus4-46928}, pages = {10}, abstract = {The endoscopic features associated with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) may be missed during routine endoscopy. We aimed to develop and evaluate an Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithm for detecting and quantifying the endoscopic features of EoE in white light images, supplemented by the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). An AI algorithm (AI-EoE) was constructed and trained to differentiate between EoE and normal esophagus using endoscopic white light images extracted from the database of the University Hospital Augsburg. In addition to binary classification, a second algorithm was trained with specific auxiliary branches for each EREFS feature (AI-EoE-EREFS). The AI algorithms were evaluated on an external data set from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC), and compared with the performance of human endoscopists with varying levels of experience. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of AI-EoE were 0.93 for all measures, while the AUC was 0.986. With additional auxiliary branches for the EREFS categories, the AI algorithm (AI-EoEEREFS) performance improved to 0.96, 0.94, 0.95, and 0.992 for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC, respectively. AI-EoE and AI-EoE-EREFS performed significantly better than endoscopy beginners and senior fellows on the same set of images. An AI algorithm can be trained to detect and quantify endoscopic features of EoE with excellent performance scores. The addition of the EREFS criteria improved the performance of the AI algorithm, which performed significantly better than endoscopists with a lower or medium experience level.}, language = {en} } @misc{ScheppachRauberStallhoferetal., author = {Scheppach, Markus and Rauber, David and Stallhofer, Johannes and Muzalyova, Anna and Otten, Vera and Manzeneder, Carolin and Schwamberger, Tanja and Wanzl, Julia and Schlottmann, Jakob and Tadic, Vidan and Probst, Andreas and Schnoy, Elisabeth and R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Fleischmann, Carola and Meinikheim, Michael and Miller, Silvia and M{\"a}rkl, Bruno and Palm, Christoph and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {Performance comparison of a deep learning algorithm with endoscopists in the detection of duodenal villous atrophy (VA)}, series = {Endoscopy}, volume = {55}, journal = {Endoscopy}, number = {S02}, publisher = {Thieme}, doi = {10.1055/s-0043-1765421}, pages = {S165}, abstract = {Aims VA is an endoscopic finding of celiac disease (CD), which can easily be missed if pretest probability is low. In this study, we aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm for the detection of villous atrophy on endoscopic images. Methods 858 images from 182 patients with VA and 846 images from 323 patients with normal duodenal mucosa were used for training and internal validation of an AI algorithm (ResNet18). A separate dataset was used for external validation, as well as determination of detection performance of experts, trainees and trainees with AI support. According to the AI consultation distribution, images were stratified into "easy" and "difficult". Results Internal validation showed 82\%, 85\% and 84\% for sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. External validation showed 90\%, 76\% and 84\%. The algorithm was significantly more sensitive and accurate than trainees, trainees with AI support and experts in endoscopy. AI support in trainees was associated with significantly improved performance. While all endoscopists showed significantly lower detection for "difficult" images, AI performance remained stable. Conclusions The algorithm outperformed trainees and experts in sensitivity and accuracy for VA detection. The significant improvement with AI support suggests a potential clinical benefit. Stable performance of the algorithm in "easy" and "difficult" test images may indicate an advantage in macroscopically challenging cases.}, language = {en} } @article{ScheppachRauberStallhoferetal., author = {Scheppach, Markus W. and Rauber, David and Stallhofer, Johannes and Muzalyova, Anna and Otten, Vera and Manzeneder, Carolin and Schwamberger, Tanja and Wanzl, Julia and Schlottmann, Jakob and Tadic, Vidan and Probst, Andreas and Schnoy, Elisabeth and R{\"o}mmele, Christoph and Fleischmann, Carola and Meinikheim, Michael and Miller, Silvia and M{\"a}rkl, Bruno and Stallmach, Andreas and Palm, Christoph and Messmann, Helmut and Ebigbo, Alanna}, title = {Detection of duodenal villous atrophy on endoscopic images using a deep learning algorithm}, series = {Gastrointestinal Endoscopy}, journal = {Gastrointestinal Endoscopy}, publisher = {Elsevier}, doi = {10.1016/j.gie.2023.01.006}, abstract = {Background and aims Celiac disease with its endoscopic manifestation of villous atrophy is underdiagnosed worldwide. The application of artificial intelligence (AI) for the macroscopic detection of villous atrophy at routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy may improve diagnostic performance. Methods A dataset of 858 endoscopic images of 182 patients with villous atrophy and 846 images from 323 patients with normal duodenal mucosa was collected and used to train a ResNet 18 deep learning model to detect villous atrophy. An external data set was used to test the algorithm, in addition to six fellows and four board certified gastroenterologists. Fellows could consult the AI algorithm's result during the test. From their consultation distribution, a stratification of test images into "easy" and "difficult" was performed and used for classified performance measurement. Results External validation of the AI algorithm yielded values of 90 \%, 76 \%, and 84 \% for sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, respectively. Fellows scored values of 63 \%, 72 \% and 67 \%, while the corresponding values in experts were 72 \%, 69 \% and 71 \%, respectively. AI consultation significantly improved all trainee performance statistics. While fellows and experts showed significantly lower performance for "difficult" images, the performance of the AI algorithm was stable. Conclusion In this study, an AI algorithm outperformed endoscopy fellows and experts in the detection of villous atrophy on endoscopic still images. AI decision support significantly improved the performance of non-expert endoscopists. The stable performance on "difficult" images suggests a further positive add-on effect in challenging cases.}, language = {en} }