CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2018; 06(04): E462-E469
DOI: 10.1055/a-0573-1044
Original article
Owner and Copyright © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2018

Development and validation of an automated algorithm to evaluate the abundance of bubbles in small bowel capsule endoscopy

Olivia Pietri
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
,
Gada Rezgui
2   ETIS, ENSEA, Cergy-Pontoise University, Cergy-Pontoise, France
,
Aymeric Histace
2   ETIS, ENSEA, Cergy-Pontoise University, Cergy-Pontoise, France
,
Marine Camus
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
3   Sorbonne University, Paris, France
,
Isabelle Nion-Larmurier
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
,
Cynthia Li
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
4   College of Arts and Sciences, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Aymeric Becq
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
,
Einas Abou Ali
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
,
Olivier Romain
2   ETIS, ENSEA, Cergy-Pontoise University, Cergy-Pontoise, France
,
Ulriikka Chaput
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
,
Philippe Marteau
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
2   ETIS, ENSEA, Cergy-Pontoise University, Cergy-Pontoise, France
,
Christian Florent
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
2   ETIS, ENSEA, Cergy-Pontoise University, Cergy-Pontoise, France
,
Xavier Dray
1   APHP Saint Antoine Hospital, Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Paris, France
2   ETIS, ENSEA, Cergy-Pontoise University, Cergy-Pontoise, France
3   Sorbonne University, Paris, France
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 10 August 2017

accepted after revision 03 January 2018

Publication Date:
29 March 2018 (online)

Abstract

Background and study aims Bubbles can impair visualization of the small bowel (SB) mucosa during capsule endoscopy (CE). We aimed to develop and validate a computed algorithm that would allow evaluation of the abundance of bubbles in SB-CE still frames.

Patients and methods Two sets of 200 SB-CE normal still frames were created. Two experienced SB-CE readers analyzed both sets of images twice, in a random order. Each still frame was categorized as presenting with < 10 % or ≥ 10 % of bubbles. Reproducibility (κ), sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), receiver operating characteristic curve, and calculation time were measured for different algorithms (Grey-level of co-occurrence matrix [GLCM], fractal dimension, Hough transform, and speeded-up robust features [SURF]) using the experts’ analysis as reference. Algorithms with highest reproducibility, Se and Sp were then selected for a validation step on the second set of frames. Criteria for validation were κ = 1, Se ≥ 90 %, Sp ≥ 85 %, and a calculation time < 1 second.

Results Both SURF and GLCM algorithms had high operating points (Se and Sp over 90 %) and a perfect reproducibility (κ = 1). The validation step showed the GLCM detector strategy had the best diagnostic performances, with a Se of 95.79 %, a Sp of 95.19 %, and a calculation time of 0.037 seconds per frame.

Conclusion A computed algorithm based on a GLCM detector strategy had high diagnostic performance allowing assessment of the abundance of bubbles in SB-CE still frames. This algorithm could be of interest for clinical use (quality reporting) and for research purposes (objective comparison tool of different preparations).

 
  • References

  • 1 Iddan G, Meron G, Glukhovsky A. et al. Wireless capsule endoscopy. Nature 2000; 405: 417
  • 2 Pennazio M, Spada C, Eliakim R. et al. Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 352-376
  • 3 Yung DE, Rondonotti E, Sykes C. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis: is bowel preparation still necessary in small bowel capsule endoscopy?. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 11: 979-993
  • 4 Koulaouzidis A, Iakovidis DK, Karargyris A. et al. Optimizing lesion detection in small-bowel capsule endoscopy: from present problems to future solutions. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 9: 217-235
  • 5 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G. et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-625
  • 6 Van Weyenberg SJB, De Leest HTJI, Mulder CJJ. Description of a novel grading system to assess the quality of bowel preparation in video capsule endoscopy. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 406-411
  • 7 Abou Ali E, Histace A, Camus A. et al. Development and validation of a highly sensitive and highly specific computed assessment of cleansing score for small bowel capsule endoscopy. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: A604
  • 8 Albert J, Göbel CM, Lesske J. et al. Simethicone for small bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy: a systematic, single-blinded, controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 487-491
  • 9 Wu L, Cao Y, Liao C. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of Simethicone for gastrointestinal endoscopic visibility. Scand J Gastroenterol 2011; 46: 227-235
  • 10 Fang YH, Chen CX, Zhang BL. Effect of small bowel preparation with simethicone on capsule endoscopy. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2009; 10: 46-51
  • 11 Spada C, Riccioni ME, Familiari P. et al. Polyethylene glycol plus simethicone in small-bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy. Dig Liver Dis 2010; 42: 365-370
  • 12 Rosa BJ, Barbosa M, Magalhaes J. et al. Oral purgative and simethicone before small bowel capsule endoscopy. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 5: 67-73
  • 13 Papamichael K, Karatzas P, Theodoropoulos I. et al. Simethicone adjunct to polyethylene glycol improves small bowel capsule endoscopy imaging in non-Crohnʼs disease patients. Ann Gastroenterol 2015; 28: 464-468
  • 14 Keuchel M, Kurniawan N, Baltes P. et al. Quantitative measurements in capsule endoscopy. Comput Biol Med 2015; 65: 333-347
  • 15 Koulaouzidis A, Giannakou A, Yung DE. et al. Do prokinetics influence the completion rate in small-bowel capsule endoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Med Res Opin 2013 Sep 29: 1171-1185
  • 16 Brotz C, Nandi N, Conn M. et al. A validation study of 3 grading systems to evaluate small-bowel cleansing for wireless capsule endoscopy: a quantitative index, a qualitative evaluation, and an overall adequacy assessment. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 262-270
  • 17 Klein A, Gizbar M, Bourke MJ. et al. Validated computed cleansing score for videocapsule endoscopy. Dig Endosc 2016; 28: 564-569
  • 18 Hough PVC. Method and Means for Recognizing Complex Patterns. US Patent 3,069,654, 1962 Ser. No. 17,7156 Claims
  • 19 Vilarino F, Malagelada C, Azpiroz F. et al. Categorization and segmentation of intestinal content frames for wireless capsule endoscopy. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2012; 16: 1341-1352
  • 20 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174