The influence of computer-aided polyp detection systems on reaction time for polyp detection and eye gaze

Background  Multiple computer-aided systems for polyp detection (CADe) have been introduced into clinical practice, with an unclear effect on examiner behavior. This study aimed to measure the influence of a CADe system on reaction time, mucosa misinterpretation, and changes in visual gaze pattern. Methods  Participants with variable levels of colonoscopy experience viewed video sequences (n = 29) while eye movement was tracked. Using a crossover design, videos were presented in two assessments, with and without CADe support. Reaction time for polyp detection and eye-tracking metrics were evaluated. Results  21 participants performed 1218 experiments. CADe was significantly faster in detecting polyps compared with participants (median 1.16 seconds [99 %CI 0.40–3.43] vs. 2.97 seconds [99 %CI 2.53–3.77], respectively). However, the reaction time of participants when using CADe (median 2.90 seconds [99 %CI 2.55–3.38]) was similar to that without CADe. CADe increased misinterpretation of normal mucosa and reduced the eye travel distance. Conclusions  Results confirm that CADe systems detect polyps faster than humans. However, use of CADe did not improve human reaction times. It increased misinterpretation of normal mucosa and decreased the eye travel distance. Possible consequences of these findings might be prolonged examination time and deskilling.

[1]  M. Wallace,et al.  Computer-aided detection versus advanced imaging for detection of colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. , 2021, The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology.

[2]  M. Neurath,et al.  Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps using a newly generated deep convolutional neural network: from development to first clinical experience , 2021, European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology.

[3]  C. Hassan,et al.  Performance of a new integrated computer-assisted system (CADe/CADx) for detection and characterization of colorectal neoplasia , 2021, Endoscopy.

[4]  M. Wallace,et al.  Computer-aided detection-assisted colonoscopy: classification and relevance of false positives. , 2020, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[5]  M. Wallace,et al.  Efficacy of Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Randomized Trial. , 2020, Gastroenterology.

[6]  M. Kaminski,et al.  Optimizing the Quality of Colorectal Cancer Screening Worldwide. , 2019, Gastroenterology.

[7]  C. Hassan,et al.  Advanced imaging for detection and differentiation of colorectal neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline – Update 2019 , 2019, Endoscopy.

[8]  Alessandro Repici,et al.  New artificial intelligence system: first validation study versus experienced endoscopists for colorectal polyp detection , 2019, Gut.

[9]  A. Darzi,et al.  Gaze patterns hold key to unlocking successful search strategies and increasing polyp detection rate in colonoscopy , 2018, Endoscopy.

[10]  Tianjiang Hu,et al.  AprilTag array-aided extrinsic calibration of camera–laser multi-sensor system , 2016, Robotics and biomimetics.

[11]  Muhammad F Dawwas,et al.  Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  Maria Pellisé,et al.  Advanced imaging for detection and differentiation of colorectal neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline , 2014, Endoscopy.

[13]  Michael B Wallace,et al.  Association Between Visual Gaze Patterns and Adenoma Detection Rate During Colonoscopy: A Preliminary Investigation , 2011, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[14]  Nassir Navab,et al.  “Eye-tracking” for assessment of image perception in gastrointestinal endoscopy with narrow-band imaging compared with white-light endoscopy , 2010, Endoscopy.

[15]  J. Johanson,et al.  Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.