BACKGROUND Limited data currently exists on the clinical utility of Artificial Intelligence Assisted Colonoscopy(AIAC)outside of clinical trials.AIM To evaluate the impact of AIAC on key markers of colonoscopy quality...BACKGROUND Limited data currently exists on the clinical utility of Artificial Intelligence Assisted Colonoscopy(AIAC)outside of clinical trials.AIM To evaluate the impact of AIAC on key markers of colonoscopy quality compared to conventional colonoscopy(CC).METHODS This single-centre retrospective observational cohort study included all patients undergoing colonoscopy at a secondary centre in Brisbane,Australia.CC outcomes between October 2021 and October 2022 were compared with AIAC outcomes after the introduction of the Olympus Endo-AID module from October 2022 to January 2023.Endoscopists who conducted over 50 procedures before and after AIAC introduction were included.Procedures for surveillance of inflammatory bowel disease were excluded.Patient demographics,proceduralist specialisation,indication for colonoscopy,and colonoscopy quality metrics were collected.Adenoma detection rate(ADR)and sessile serrated lesion detection rate(SSLDR)were calculated for both AIAC and CC.RESULTS The study included 746 AIAC procedures and 2162 CC procedures performed by seven endoscopists.Baseline patient demographics were similar,with median age of 60 years with a slight female predominance(52.1%).Procedure indications,bowel preparation quality,and caecal intubation rates were comparable between groups.AIAC had a slightly longer withdrawal time compared to CC,but the difference was not statistically significant.The introduction of AIAC did not significantly change ADR(52.1%for AIAC vs 52.6%for CC,P=0.91)or SSLDR(17.4%for AIAC vs 18.1%for CC,P=0.44).CONCLUSION The implementation of AIAC failed to improve key markers of colonoscopy quality,including ADR,SSLDR and withdrawal time.Further research is required to assess the utility and cost-efficiency of AIAC for high performing endoscopists.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Limited data currently exists on the clinical utility of Artificial Intelligence Assisted Colonoscopy(AIAC)outside of clinical trials.AIM To evaluate the impact of AIAC on key markers of colonoscopy quality compared to conventional colonoscopy(CC).METHODS This single-centre retrospective observational cohort study included all patients undergoing colonoscopy at a secondary centre in Brisbane,Australia.CC outcomes between October 2021 and October 2022 were compared with AIAC outcomes after the introduction of the Olympus Endo-AID module from October 2022 to January 2023.Endoscopists who conducted over 50 procedures before and after AIAC introduction were included.Procedures for surveillance of inflammatory bowel disease were excluded.Patient demographics,proceduralist specialisation,indication for colonoscopy,and colonoscopy quality metrics were collected.Adenoma detection rate(ADR)and sessile serrated lesion detection rate(SSLDR)were calculated for both AIAC and CC.RESULTS The study included 746 AIAC procedures and 2162 CC procedures performed by seven endoscopists.Baseline patient demographics were similar,with median age of 60 years with a slight female predominance(52.1%).Procedure indications,bowel preparation quality,and caecal intubation rates were comparable between groups.AIAC had a slightly longer withdrawal time compared to CC,but the difference was not statistically significant.The introduction of AIAC did not significantly change ADR(52.1%for AIAC vs 52.6%for CC,P=0.91)or SSLDR(17.4%for AIAC vs 18.1%for CC,P=0.44).CONCLUSION The implementation of AIAC failed to improve key markers of colonoscopy quality,including ADR,SSLDR and withdrawal time.Further research is required to assess the utility and cost-efficiency of AIAC for high performing endoscopists.
