Leaving colorectal polyps in situ with endocytoscopy assisted by computer-aided diagnosis: a cost-effectiveness study

Abstract

Background Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) enables the distinction between neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps during colonoscopy. We aimed to estimate the patient-level benefit and harm of CADx.

Methods We conducted a comparative analysis on data from the EndoBRAIN international clinical trial, evaluating the effect of optical diagnosis during colonoscopy with and without CADx. Three hypothetical scenarios were compared: “endoscopist-alone” and “CADx-assisted” leave-in-situ strategies (leaving non-neoplastic rectosigmoid polyps ≤ 5 mm), and “total removal” (removing all detected polyps). Primary outcomes included patient-level colonoscopy-related cost and surveillance interval agreement (colorectal cancer risk category). Estimates were calculated based on national reimbursement rates and guidelines in four countries.

Results We analyzed 1134 patients (59 % men, median age 67 years) with 1716 polyps. Compared with total removal, the endoscopist-alone and CADx-assisted leave-in-situ strategies reduced the removed polyps per patient from 1.51 (95 %CI 1.48–1.54) to 1.18 (95 %CI 1.16–1.20) and 1.12 (95 %CI 1.00–1.14), respectively; however, 0.023 (95 %CI 0.015–0.033) and 0.021 (95 %CI 0.014–0.031) neoplasms per patient were left in situ, respectively. The mean colonoscopy cost decreased by $44 (endoscopist alone) and $46 (CADx assistance) in the USA, $22 and $19 in the UK, $21 and $19 in Japan, and $32 and $30 in Norway, respectively. Surveillance interval agreement decreased to 99.2 % (endoscopist alone) and 99.0 % (CADx assistance) in the USA, 99.8 % and 99.8 % in the UK, 97.9 % and 97.1 % in Japan, and 99.9 % and 99.9 % in Norway, respectively.

Conclusions Both endoscopist-alone and CADx-assisted optical diagnosis reduce colonoscopy costs. The risk of missed adenomas and surveillance interval deviations appear marginal.

^‡ Joint first authors

^* Joint last authors

Publication History

Received: 19 August 2024

Accepted after revision: 08 January 2025

Article published online:
25 February 2025

• References

• 1 Bretthauer M, Løberg M, Wieszczy P. et al. Effect of colonoscopy screening on risks of colorectal cancer and related death. NEJM 2022; 387: 1547-1556
• 2 Helsingen LM, Vandvik PO, Jodal HC. et al. Colorectal cancer screening with faecal immunochemical testing, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ 2019; 367: 15515
• 3 Atia MA, Patel NC, Ratuapli SK. et al. Nonneoplastic polypectomy during screening colonoscopy: the impact on polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and overall cost. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 370-375.e371
• 4 Rex DK, Kahi C, O'Brien M. et al. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 419-422
• 5 Houwen B, Hassan C, Coupé VMH. et al. Definition of competence standards for optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 88-99
• 6 Willems P, Djinbachian R, Ditisheim S. et al. Uptake and barriers for implementation of the resect and discard strategy: an international survey. Endosc Int Open 2020; 08: E684-E692
• 7 Wadhwa V, Alagappan M, Gonzalez A. et al. Physician sentiment toward artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopic practice: a survey of US gastroenterologists. Endosc Int Open 2020; 08: E1379-E1384
• 8 Horiuchi H, Tamai N, Kamba S. et al. Real-time computer-aided diagnosis of diminutive rectosigmoid polyps using an auto-fluorescence imaging system and novel color intensity analysis software. Scand J Gastroenterol 2019; 54: 800-805
• 9 Mori Y, Kudo SE, Misawa M. et al. Real-time use of artificial intelligence in identification of diminutive polyps during colonoscopy: a prospective study. Ann Intern Med 2018; 169: 357-366
• 10 Hassan C, Spadaccini M, Alfarone L. et al. Characterization comparison between two CAD systems (combo CAD study) in real-life endoscopy: an interim analysis. Endoscopy 2022; 54 (Suppl. 01) S156
• 11 Barua I, Wieszczy P, Kudo S-E. et al. Real-time artificial intelligence–based optical diagnosis of neoplastic polyps during colonoscopy. NEJM Evid 2022; 01: EVIDoa2200003
• 12 Atkinson NS, East JE. Optical biopsy and sessile serrated polyps: Is DISCARD dead? Long live DISCARD-lite!. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 118-121
• 13 GI endoscopy coding and reimbursement guide. National Medicare average. Available from (Accessed 29 January 2025): www.cookmedical.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/RG_OHNS_RE_202201.pdf
• 14 NHS. Annex A: The national tariff workbook. 2022/2023. Available from (Accessed 29 January 2025): www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/22-23-National-tariff-payment-system.pdf
• 15 Mori Y, Kudo SE, East JE. et al. Cost savings in colonoscopy with artificial intelligence-aided polyp diagnosis: an add-on analysis of a clinical trial (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 905-911.e901
• 16 Norwegian Directorate of Health. DRG system [in Norwegian]. Updated: 21 December 2022. Available from (Accessed 17 February 2023): www.helsedirektoratet.no/tema/finansiering/innsatsstyrt-finansiering-og-drg-systemet/drg-systemet
• 17 Norwegian Directorate of Health. Effort-based financing [in Norwegian]. Available from (Accessed 17 February 2023): www.helsedirektoratet.no/tema/finansiering/innsatsstyrt-finansiering-og-drg-systemet/innsatsstyrt-finansiering-isf
• 18 Norwegian Health Economics Administration. New reimbursement scheme for outpatient pathology [in Norwegian]. Updated: 19 December 2022. Available from (Accessed 17 February 2023): www.helfo.no/Sykehus-poliklinikk/regelverk-og-takster-for-sykehus-poliklinikk/regelverk-og-refusjon-for-sjukehus-og-poliklinikk/ny-refusjonsordning-for-poliklinisk-patologi
• 19 Lovdata. Regulations relating to remuneration for providing outpatient healthcare in the specialist health service (the Outpatient Clinic Regulations [in Norwegian]. Available from (Accessed 17 February 2023): https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2007-12-19-1761
• 20 Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC. et al. Recommendations for follow-up after colonoscopy and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1131-1153 e1135
• 21 Rutter MD, East J, Rees CJ. et al. British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines. Gut 2020; 69: 201-223
• 22 Saito Y, Oka S, Kawamura T. et al. Colonoscopy screening and surveillance guidelines. Dig Endosc 2021; 33: 486-519
• 23 Hassan C, Antonelli G, Dumonceau JM. et al. Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline – Update 2020. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 687-700
• 24 Ladabaum U, Mannalithara A, Meester RGS. et al. Cost-effectiveness and national effects of initiating colorectal cancer screening for average-risk persons at age 45 years instead of 50 years. Gastroenterology 2019; 157: 137-148
• 25 Ravindran S, Bassett P, Shaw T. et al. National census of UK endoscopy services in 2019. Frontline Gastroenterol 2021; 12: 451-460
• 26 Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare of Japan. The 9th National Database (NDB) open data [web document; in Japanese]. Available from (Accessed 1 October 2024): www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/0000177221_00014.html
• 27 Norwegian Directorate of Health. Activity in General Hospitals [in Norwegian]. Available from (Accessed 23 March 2024): www.helsedirektoratet.no/statistikk/statistikk-fra-npr/aktivitet-somatiske-sykehus
• 28 McGill SK, Evangelou E, Ioannidis JP. et al. Narrow band imaging to differentiate neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal polyps in real time: a meta-analysis of diagnostic operating characteristics. Gut 2013; 62: 1704-1713
• 29 Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Rex DK. A resect and discard strategy would improve cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 08: 865-869, 869.e861-863
• 30 Rondonotti E, Hassan C, Tamanini G. et al. Artificial intelligence-assisted optical diagnosis for the resect-and-discard strategy in clinical practice: the Artificial intelligence BLI Characterization (ABC) study. Endoscopy 2023; 55: 14-22