Refine
Document Type
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (8)
Keywords
- Artificial Intelligence (4)
- Diagnose (4)
- Künstliche Intelligenz (3)
- Maschinelles Lernen (3)
- Barrett's esophagus (2)
- Deep learning (2)
- Speiseröhrenkrankheit (2)
- Adenocarcinoma (1)
- Barrett's Esophagus (1)
- Barrett-Ösophagus (1)
Institute
Begutachtungsstatus
- peer-reviewed (7)
The growing number of publications on the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine underlines the enormous importance and potential of this emerging field of research.
In gastrointestinal endoscopy, AI has been applied to all segments of the gastrointestinal tract most importantly in the detection and characterization of colorectal polyps. However, AI research has been published also in the stomach and esophagus for both neoplastic and non-neoplastic disorders.
The various technical as well as medical aspects of AI, however, remain confusing especially for non-expert physicians.
This physician-engineer co-authored review explains the basic technical aspects of AI and provides a comprehensive overview of recent publications on AI in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Finally, a basic insight is offered into understanding publications on AI in gastrointestinal endoscopy.
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.
Einleitung
Die sichere Detektion und Charakterisierung von Barrett-Ösophagus assoziierten Neoplasien (BERN) stellt selbst für erfahrene Endoskopiker eine Herausforderung dar.
Ziel
Ziel dieser Studie ist es, den Add-on Effekt eines künstlichen Intelligenz (KI) Systems (Barrett-Ampel) als Entscheidungsunterstüzungssystem für Endoskopiker ohne Expertise bei der Untersuchung von BERN zu evaluieren.
Material und Methodik
Zwölf Videos in „Weißlicht“ (WL), „narrow-band imaging“ (NBI) und „texture and color enhanced imaging“ (TXI) von histologisch bestätigten 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 zusätzlicher KI-Unterstützung gezeigt. Basierend auf dieser neuen Information, wurden die Probanden zu einer Reevaluation ihrer initialen Beurteilung aufgefordert.
Ergebnisse
Die „Barrett-Ampel“ identifizierte unabhängig von den verwendeten Darstellungsmodi (WL, NBI, TXI) alle BERN. Zwei entzündlich veränderte Läsionen wurden fehlinterpretiert (Genauigkeit=75%). Während 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 unterstützt, erreichten diese eine Genauigkeit von 75%.
Zusammenfassung
Unser KI-System hat das Potential als Entscheidungsunterstützungssystem 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 bestätigen, müssen randomisierte kontrollierte klinische Studien durchgeführt werden.
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.
Background and aims: The accurate differentiation between T1a and T1b Barrett’s cancer has both therapeutic and prognostic implications but is challenging even for experienced physicians. We trained an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system on the basis of deep artificial neural networks (deep learning) to differentiate between T1a and T1b Barrett’s cancer white-light images.
Methods: Endoscopic images from three tertiary care centres in Germany were collected retrospectively. A deep learning system was trained and tested using the principles of cross-validation. A total of 230 white-light endoscopic images (108 T1a and 122 T1b) was evaluated with the AI-system. For comparison, the images were also classified by experts specialized in endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of Barrett’s cancer.
Results: The sensitivity, specificity, F1 and accuracy of the AI-system in the differentiation between T1a and T1b cancer lesions was 0.77, 0.64, 0.73 and 0.71, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the performance of the AI-system and that of human experts with sensitivity, specificity, F1 and accuracy of 0.63, 0.78, 0.67 and 0.70 respectively.
Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrates the first multicenter application of an AI-based system in the prediction of submucosal invasion in endoscopic images of Barrett’s cancer. AI scored equal to international experts in the field, but more work is necessary to improve the system and apply it to video sequences and in a real-life setting. Nevertheless, the correct prediction of submucosal invasion in Barret´s cancer remains challenging for both experts and AI.
Based on previous work by our group with manual annotation of visible Barrett oesophagus (BE) cancer images, a real-time deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) system was developed. While an expert endoscopist conducts the endoscopic assessment of BE, our AI system captures random images from the real-time camera livestream and provides a global prediction (classification), as well as a dense prediction (segmentation) differentiating accurately between normal BE and early oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The AI system showed an accuracy of 89.9% on 14 cases with neoplastic BE.
In this study, we aimed to develop an artificial intelligence clinical decision support solution to mitigate operator-dependent limitations during complex endoscopic procedures such as endoscopic submucosal dissection and peroral endoscopic myotomy, for example, bleeding and perforation. A DeepLabv3-based model was trained to delineate vessels, tissue structures and instruments on endoscopic still images from such procedures. The mean cross-validated Intersection over Union and Dice Score were 63% and 76%, respectively. Applied to standardised video clips from third-space endoscopic procedures, the algorithm showed a mean vessel detection rate of 85% with a false-positive rate of 0.75/min. These performance statistics suggest a potential clinical benefit for procedure safety, time and also training.
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.