Skip to main content
. 2017 May 24;49(8):813–819. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-109430

Table 1. Summary of preclinical and clinical studies involving computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for colonoscopy (experimental studies excluded).

Reference Year Type of CAD Endoscopic modality Study design Subjects Accuracy 1
Fernandez-Esparrach 3 2016 Automated detection White-light endoscopy Retrospective study 31 lesions  –  2
Takemura 19 2010 Automated classification Magnifying chromoendoscopy Retrospective study 134 images 99 %
Tischendorf 12 2010 Automated classification Magnifying NBI Post hoc analysis of prospectively acquired data 209 lesions 85 %
Gross 13 2011 Automated classification Magnifying NBI Post hoc analysis of prospectively acquired data 434 lesions 93 %
Takemura 14 2012 Automated classification Magnifying NBI Retrospective study 371 lesions 97 %
Kominami 8 2016 Automated classification Magnifying NBI Prospective study 118 lesions 93 %
Mori 20 2015 Automated classification Endocytoscopy Retrospective study 176 lesions 89 %
Mori 9 2016 Automated classification Endocytoscopy Retrospective study 205 lesions 89 %
Misawa 15 2016 Automated classification Endocytoscopy combined with NBI Retrospective study 100 images 90 %
Andre 21 2012 Automated classification Confocal laser endomicroscopy Retrospective study 135 lesions 90 %
Kuiper 22 2015 Automated classification Laser-induced autofluorescence spectroscopy Prospective study 207 lesions 74 %
Rath 10 2015 Automated classification Laser-induced autofluorescence spectroscopy Prospective study 137 lesions 85 %
Aihara 23 2013 Automated classification Autofluorescence imaging Prospective study 102 lesions  –  3
Inomata 24 2013 Automated classification Autofluorescence imaging Post hoc analysis of prospectively acquired data 163 lesions 83 %

NBI, narrow-band imaging.

1

Accuracy is expressed in terms of the differentiation of adenomas from non-neoplastic lesions.

2

The sensitivity and specificity were 70.4 % and 72.4 %, respectively. No description regarding accuracy was found in this study.

3

The sensitivity and specificity were 94.2 % and 88.9 %, respectively. No description regarding accuracy was found in this study.