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: Aug 30, 2021
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 30, 2021 - Sep 7, 2021
Date Accepted: Oct 13, 2021
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

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

Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Ulcer and Hemorrhage Using Wireless Capsule Endoscopy: Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-analysis

Bang CS, Lee JJ, Baik GH

Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Ulcer and Hemorrhage Using Wireless Capsule Endoscopy: Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-analysis

J Med Internet Res 2021;23(12):e33267

DOI: 10.2196/33267

PMID: 34904949

PMCID: 8715364

Computer-aided diagnosis of gastrointestinal ulcer and hemorrhage using wireless capsule endoscopy: a systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis

  • Chang Seok Bang; 
  • Jae Jun Lee; 
  • Gwang Ho Baik

ABSTRACT

Background:

Interpretation of capsule endoscopy images or movies is operator-dependent and time-consuming. As a result, computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) has been applied to enhance the efficacy and accuracy of the review process. Two previous meta-analyses reported the diagnostic performance of CAD models for gastrointestinal ulcers or hemorrhage in capsule endoscopy. However, insufficient systematic reviews have been conducted, which cannot determine the real diagnostic validity of CAD models.

Objective:

To evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of CAD models for gastrointestinal ulcers or hemorrhage using wireless capsule endoscopic images.

Methods:

We conducted core databases searching for studies based on CAD models for the diagnosis of ulcers or hemorrhage using capsule endoscopy and presenting data on diagnostic performance. Systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis were performed.

Results:

Overall, 39 studies were included. The pooled area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CAD models for the diagnosis of ulcers (or erosions) were .97 (95% confidence interval, .95–.98), .93 (.89–.95), .92 (.89–.94), and 138 (79–243), respectively. The pooled area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CAD models for the diagnosis of hemorrhage (or angioectasia) were .99 (.98–.99), .96 (.94–0.97), .97 (.95–.99), and 888 (343–2303), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed robust results. Meta-regression showed that published year, number of training images, and target disease (ulcers vs. erosions, hemorrhage vs. angioectasia) was found to be the source of heterogeneity. No publication bias was detected.

Conclusions:

CAD models showed high performance for the optical diagnosis of gastrointestinal ulcer and hemorrhage in wireless capsule endoscopy. Clinical Trial: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42021253454 ; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=42021253454.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Bang CS, Lee JJ, Baik GH

Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Ulcer and Hemorrhage Using Wireless Capsule Endoscopy: Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-analysis

J Med Internet Res 2021;23(12):e33267

DOI: 10.2196/33267

PMID: 34904949

PMCID: 8715364

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.