Refine
Year of publication
- 2024 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- conference proceeding (presentation, abstract) (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Institute
- Fakultät Informatik und Mathematik (2) (remove)
Begutachtungsstatus
- peer-reviewed (1)
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.
Aims
While AI has been successfully implemented in detecting and characterizing colonic polyps, its role in therapeutic endoscopy remains to be elucidated. Especially third space endoscopy procedures like ESD and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) pose a technical challenge and the risk of operator-dependent complications like intraprocedural bleeding and perforation. Therefore, we aimed at developing an AI-algorithm for intraprocedural real time vessel detection during ESD and POEM.
Methods
A training dataset consisting of 5470 annotated still images from 59 full-length videos (47 ESD, 12 POEM) and 179681 unlabeled images was used to train a DeepLabV3+neural network with the ECMT semi-supervised learning method. Evaluation for vessel detection rate (VDR) and time (VDT) of 19 endoscopists with and without AI-support was performed using a testing dataset of 101 standardized video clips with 200 predefined blood vessels. Endoscopists were stratified into trainees and experts in third space endoscopy.
Results
The AI algorithm had a mean VDR of 93.5% and a median VDT of 0.32 seconds. AI support was associated with a statistically significant increase in VDR from 54.9% to 73.0% and from 59.0% to 74.1% for trainees and experts, respectively. VDT significantly decreased from 7.21 sec to 5.09 sec for trainees and from 6.10 sec to 5.38 sec for experts in the AI-support group. False positive (FP) readings occurred in 4.5% of frames. FP structures were detected significantly shorter than true positives (0.71 sec vs. 5.99 sec).
Conclusions
AI improved VDR and VDT of trainees and experts in third space endoscopy and may reduce performance variability during training. Further research is needed to evaluate the clinical impact of this new technology.