Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

AI-Assisted Colonoscopy Improves Right-Sided Adenoma Detection in Gastroenterology FellowsAI helps trainee doctors find more polyps in colonoscopies

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider AI-assisted colonoscopy as a training tool to improve right-sided adenoma detection in fellows, though overall ADR benefit was not significant.

This pragmatic randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of AI-enhanced colonoscopy on adenoma detection among gastroenterology fellows. Sixteen fellows performed 1045 colonoscopies, randomized daily to AI-assisted or conventional colonoscopy (CC). The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR).

Overall ADR was 40.5% ± 3.9% with AI versus 35.0% ± 3.6% with CC, a mean difference of 5.5% (95% CI, -4.3% to 15.3%), which was not statistically significant. However, right-sided colon ADR (RADR) was significantly higher with AI: 24.1% vs 16.5% (mean difference 7.6%; 95% CI, 1.7%-13.5%). In screening colonoscopies (130 procedures), AI showed a numerically higher ADR (49.1% vs 26.7%; mean difference 22.3%; 95% CI, -2.7% to 47.4%) and significantly higher RADR (35.1% vs 13.7%; mean difference 21.0%; 95% CI, 7.6%-35.2%). Procedure and withdrawal times did not differ between groups.

Safety outcomes were not reported. The study's limitations include that the role of AI in training environments has not been thoroughly defined. No funding or conflicts were reported.

Clinically, these results suggest AI may help trainees improve adenoma detection in the right colon, a challenging area. However, the lack of significant improvement in overall ADR and the small sample size warrant cautious interpretation. AI could serve as a training tool to standardize colorectal cancer screening quality metrics.

A new study tested whether artificial intelligence could help trainee doctors find more polyps during colonoscopy. The study involved 16 gastroenterology fellows who performed 1,045 colonoscopies. Some procedures used AI-enhanced colonoscopy, while others used conventional colonoscopy. The researchers measured how often doctors detected adenomas, which are precancerous polyps.

Overall, the AI did not significantly improve the adenoma detection rate. However, when looking at the right side of the colon, AI helped fellows find more polyps. In screening colonoscopies, the AI group detected adenomas in 49.1% of cases compared to 26.7% in the conventional group. The right-sided adenoma detection rate also improved with AI.

The study did not report any safety concerns or differences in procedure time. The main limitation is that the role of AI in training settings is not yet fully defined. This was a pragmatic trial, meaning it was done in real-world conditions.

For now, these results suggest AI may help trainee doctors improve detection of polyps in the right colon, which is often harder to examine. More research is needed to confirm these findings and understand how best to use AI in training.

What this means for you:
AI may help trainee doctors find more polyps in the right colon, but overall detection rates were not significantly different.

Study Details

Study typeRct
EvidenceLevel 2
PublishedMay 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The substantial miss rate during screening and surveillance colonoscopy, particularly for the right side, underscores the need to improve training. The role of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted colonoscopy in the training environment has not been thoroughly defined. This study explores the impact of AI on colonoscopy performed by trainees in a gastroenterology (GE) fellowship program. METHODS: Between March and October 2023, we randomly assigned GE fellows to AI-enhanced versus conventional colonoscopy (CC) rooms daily. Consecutive colonoscopies performed by fellows were included unless there were attending interventions, inadequate bowel preparation, or incomplete colonoscopy. The primary end point was adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of colonoscopies with 1 or more adenomas detected. Additional outcomes included right-sided colon ADR (RADR) and left-sided colon ADR (LADR), the polyp detection rate, and procedure (colonoscope insertion to withdrawal) and withdrawal (cecum to withdrawal) times. Mean ADR differences for the AI versus CC procedures were estimated using generalized linear models. RESULTS: A total of 1045 colonoscopies were performed by 16 fellows. The overall ADR was similar for AI (40.5% ± 3.9%) versus CC (35.0% ± 3.6%), with a mean difference of 5.5% (95% CI, -4.3% to 15.3%). The RADR was higher in AI (24.1%) versus CC (16.5%), with a mean difference of 7.6% (95% CI, 1.7%-13.5%). Among 130 screening colonoscopies, ADR for AI was 49.1% versus 26.7% for CC, with a mean difference of 22.3% (95% CI, -2.7% to 47.4%), whereas RADR was higher for AI (AI: 35.1% vs CC: 13.7%), with a mean difference of 21.0% (95% CI, 7.6%-35.2%). This was most pronounced for first- and second-year fellows. There was no difference in procedural or withdrawal time with the addition of AI. CONCLUSIONS: This pragmatic randomized controlled trial demonstrates that AI-assisted colonoscopy improves RADR for GE trainees. The overall ADR was not significantly different between groups. We propose a use case via AI-assisted colonoscopy for trainees guiding improvement of adenoma detection in the right side of the colon and standardizing a critically needed colorectal cancer screening quality metric. (Clinical Trials.gov Identification NCT05423964.).
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.