Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: May 28, 2026
Date Accepted: Sep 17, 2026

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Improving Postpolypectomy Surveillance Decisions Using an Automated Analysis of Colonoscopy and Histopathology Reports: 2-Center Validation Study

Zecevic A, De Martino S, Lee JSC, To V, Bhardwaj V, Sibal R, Trudgill N, Mohamed SA, Roberts A, Zeki S

Improving Postpolypectomy Surveillance Decisions Using an Automated Analysis of Colonoscopy and Histopathology Reports: 2-Center Validation Study

J Med Internet Res 2026;28:e102789

DOI: 10.2196/102789

PMID: 42886590

Improving post-polypectomy surveillance decisions using an automated analysis of colonoscopy and histopathology reports: a two-centre validation study

  • Agathe Zecevic; 
  • Sabina De Martino; 
  • Joshua Shan Chen Lee; 
  • Victoria To; 
  • Vedant Bhardwaj; 
  • Rhea Sibal; 
  • Nigel Trudgill; 
  • Shahd A. Mohamed; 
  • Angus Roberts; 
  • Sebastian Zeki

ABSTRACT

Background:

Post-polypectomy surveillance intervals derived from colonoscopy findings and histopathology should be guideline based, yet these are frequently not adhered to, contributing to under-and over-surveillance. This suggests that a more structured and automated approach would improve adherence.

Objective:

We developed and evaluated an automated, implementable, guideline-aligned decision support tool that extracts colorectal polyp features from free-text colonoscopy and histopathology reports and produces auditable surveillance recommendations

Methods:

We extracted paired colonoscopy and histopathology reports from an NHS trust and designed a four-stage prompting pipeline using open-weight Large Language Models (LLMs) to perform pot-level segmentation, align endoscopic findings to specimens and normalise each pot into a structured schema. The surveillance intervals are then computed by a deterministic rules engine encoding guideline rules. We evaluated extraction performance on 100 procedures (215 pots), assessed surveillance recommendation performance on a same-site cohort (n=100) and performed external validation on a cohort from a second trust (n=100).

Results:

Key extraction fields showed end-to-end accuracy (specimen type 0.995; location 0.981; diagnosis 0.981; excision completeness 0.949), with report-level pot comprehensiveness 0.968±0.112. Surveillance recommendation showed strong class-level performance (F1: no follow-up 0.98/0.97; site-check 0.93/0.91; 3-year 0.86/0.80; cancer alert 1.00/1.00). The comparison to current clinical practice showed that the tool would improve guideline adherence (+10.2 percentage points), primarily by reducing potential under-surveillance (10.2% to 2.4%).

Conclusions:

This hybrid approach using open-weight LLMs for structured extraction and guideline-encoded rules for decision-making can generate accurate, computationally lightweight, auditable and generalisable post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations. Such a tool has potential to improve safety-netting and guideline adherence in NHS colonoscopy workflows.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Zecevic A, De Martino S, Lee JSC, To V, Bhardwaj V, Sibal R, Trudgill N, Mohamed SA, Roberts A, Zeki S

Improving Postpolypectomy Surveillance Decisions Using an Automated Analysis of Colonoscopy and Histopathology Reports: 2-Center Validation Study

J Med Internet Res 2026;28:e102789

DOI: 10.2196/102789

PMID: 42886590

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.