Huang Felix, Dimbu Thea Iulia, Rex Douglas K, Pohl Heiko, Hassan Cesare, Djinbachian Roupen, Michal Victoire, Kim Dong Hyun Danny, Amani Bilal, Haddouch Nahlah, Fournier Sofie, von Renteln Daniel
Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Jul 24. doi: 10.1007/s10620-025-09257-8.
Histopathology is the accepted gold standard for classifying colorectal polyps. However, the complex pathway from initial polyp detection and resection to final histological diagnosis involves multiple steps (retrieval, embedding, sectioning, interpretation), each potentially introducing diagnostic errors. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of autonomous computer-aided optical polyp diagnosis (CADx) versus histopathology, using expert consensus as the reference standard.
In this prospective study, three internationally recognized expert endoscopists independently reviewed colonoscopy images and videos of diminutive (≤ 5 mm) polyps assessed by autonomous CADx. Unanimous, high-confidence expert agreement was defined as the reference standard ('ground truth'), assumed superior due to absence of resection or specimen-management related artifacts. The primary outcome was the proportion of specimens with potential incorrect histopathology diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included comparative accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of autonomous CADx and histopathology against the expert-defined reference standard.
Among 510 patients, experts provided unanimous, high-confidence diagnoses for 226 diminutive (≤ 5 mm) colorectal polyps, serving as the reference standard. The proportion of potentially incorrect pathology diagnoses was 23% (95% CI: (17.8,29.2)). Autonomous CADx achieved a higher accuracy of 91.2% (95% CI: 86.5-94.4%), compared with pathology at 77.0% (95% CI: 70.8-82.2%; p < 0.001).
These findings highlight that histopathological diagnosis after polyp resection is not infallible and can introduce diagnostic errors in a relevant proportion of cases. CADx diagnosis, obtained during the procedure and unaffected by specimen handling artifacts, may prevent some of these errors, suggesting it could offer superior accuracy for polyp characterization in certain cases.
组织病理学是结直肠息肉分类公认的金标准。然而,从最初息肉检测和切除到最终组织学诊断的复杂过程涉及多个步骤(取回、包埋、切片、解读),每个步骤都可能引入诊断错误。我们旨在以专家共识作为参考标准,研究自主计算机辅助光学息肉诊断(CADx)与组织病理学的诊断准确性。
在这项前瞻性研究中,三位国际公认的专家内镜医师独立审查了由自主CADx评估的微小(≤5毫米)息肉的结肠镜检查图像和视频。专家们一致的、高可信度的意见被定义为参考标准(“金标准”),由于不存在与切除或标本处理相关的伪像,故假定其更具优势。主要结局是组织病理学诊断可能错误的标本比例。次要结局包括自主CADx和组织病理学相对于专家定义的参考标准的比较准确性、敏感性和特异性。
在510例患者中,专家们对226个微小(≤5毫米)结直肠息肉给出了一致的、高可信度的诊断,作为参考标准。组织病理学诊断可能错误的比例为23%(95%CI:(17.8,29.2))。自主CADx的诊断准确性更高,为91.2%(95%CI:86.5 - 94.4%),而组织病理学的诊断准确性为77.0%(95%CI:70.8 - 82.2%;p < 0.001)。
这些发现表明,息肉切除后的组织病理学诊断并非绝对可靠,在相当比例的病例中可能会引入诊断错误。在检查过程中获得的CADx诊断不受标本处理伪像的影响,可能会避免其中一些错误,这表明在某些情况下,它对息肉特征的诊断准确性可能更高。