PubMed · 17203077
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Stephen B Hanauer. 2007. Fragile egos.. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpgasthep0714
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer remains a leading cause of death despite being largely preventable through polypectomy. AI systems designed to enhance polyp detection during colonoscopy have shown promise, but the extent to which they improve detection of different-sized polyps remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the size-stratified efficacy of AI-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) method, and generated exploratory rankings while acknowledging all cross-platform comparisons are indirect. METHODS: This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science from inception to July 25, 2026, supplemented by citation searching. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AI-assisted vs standard colonoscopy in adults (≥18 years of age), reporting mean polyp detection counts stratified by size (≤5 mm, 6-9 mm, and ≥10 mm). Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. We conducted frequentist NMA using the HKSJ method with restricted maximum likelihood estimation, calculated 95% prediction intervals (PIs), and assessed heterogeneity using I2 and τ2. Certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) framework. RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs (4156 participants) compared 8 AI systems to standard colonoscopy, forming a network without direct AI comparisons. For diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), AI showed a modest advantage (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.21, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.35, 95% PI -1.12 to 1.54), but substantial heterogeneity (I2=86.6%) and wide PI crossing the null indicated high uncertainty. EndoScreener showed the most consistent evidence (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.18-0.54). For small and large polyps, effects were minimal (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.06, 95% PI -0.03 to 0.07; SMD 0.01, 95% CI 0.00-0.02, 95% PI -0.01 to 0.03). GRADE certainty was very low for diminutive polyps and low for small and large polyps. Sensitivity analysis excluding Tianjin YuJin did not materially change findings. CONCLUSIONS: AI may modestly enhance diminutive polyp detection, but effects on small and large polyps are minimal, with no platform superiority. Given very low to low certainty, findings are hypothesis-generating. This exploratory NMA provides size-stratified comparisons that can inform future head-to-head trial design. Unlike prior reviews aggregating all polyp sizes, we show the overall AI benefit is driven by diminutive polyp detection, providing a framework for targeted deployment-prioritizing AI for diminutive polyp screening, with limited value for larger lesions. Head-to-head trials are urgently needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD420251266932; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251266932.
BACKGROUND: Optical techniques using previously unexploited properties of light interaction with tissue may be valuable in the detection, diagnosis and staging of colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: A Medline search (1990 to present) was conducted on optical diagnostics in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The reference list of each identified article was reviewed for further relevant papers. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Chromoendoscopy is the only optical adjunct to colonoscopy that has been tested in large randomized clinical trials. It improves the detection of small and flat colorectal adenomas, and of neoplasia in chronic ulcerative colitis and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. All other techniques are the subject of ongoing research and the practicality of population screening with any of the methods has yet to be established. Optical techniques may, however, permit immediate clinical diagnosis, removing the need for histological analysis. They may also improve the diagnosis of early colonic neoplasia.
OBJECTIVE: The volume of colonoscopies performed is increasing and differences in colonoscopy practice over time and between centres have been reported. Examination of current practice is important for bench-marking quality. The objective of this study was to examine variations in colonoscopy practice in endoscopy centres internationally. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This observational study prospectively included consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy from 21 centres in 11 countries. Patient, procedure and centre characteristics were collected through questionnaires. Descriptive statistics were performed and the variation between centres while controlling for case-mix was examined. RESULTS: A total of 6004 patients were included in the study. Most colonoscopies (93%; range between centres 70-100%) were performed for diagnostic purposes. The proportion of main indications for colonoscopy showed wide variations between centres, the two most common indications, surveillance and haematochezia, ranging between 7-24% and 5-38%, respectively. High-quality cleansing occurred in 74% (range 51-94%) of patients, and 30% (range 0-100%) of patients received deep sedation. Three-quarters (range 0-100%) of the patients were monitored during colonoscopy, and one-quarter (range 14-35%) underwent polypectomy. Colonoscopy was complete in 89% (range 69-98%) of patients and the median total duration was 20 min (range of centre medians 15-30 min). The variation between centres was not reduced when case-mix was controlled for. CONCLUSIONS: This study documented wide variations in colonoscopy practice between centres. Controlling for case-mix did not remove these variations, indicating that centre and procedure characteristics play a role. Centres generally were within the existing guidelines, although there is still some work to be done to ensure that all centres attain the goal of providing high-quality colonoscopy.