Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background And Aims: Endoscopy guidelines recommend adhering to policies such as resect and discard only if the optical biopsy is accurate. However, accuracy in predicting histology can vary greatly. Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for characterization of colorectal lesions may help with this issue. In this study, CAD software developed at the University of Adelaide (Australia) that includes serrated polyp differentiation was validated with Japanese images on narrow-band imaging (NBI) and blue-laser imaging (BLI).
Methods: CAD software developed using machine learning and densely connected convolutional neural networks was modeled with NBI colorectal lesion images (Olympus 190 series - Australia) and validated for NBI (Olympus 290 series) and BLI (Fujifilm 700 series) with Japanese datasets. All images were correlated with histology according to the modified Sano classification. The CAD software was trained with Australian NBI images and tested with separate sets of images from Australia (NBI) and Japan (NBI and BLI).
Results: An Australian dataset of 1235 polyp images was used as training, testing, and internal validation sets. A Japanese dataset of 20 polyp images on NBI and 49 polyp images on BLI was used as external validation sets. The CAD software had a mean area under the curve (AUC) of 94.3% for the internal set and 84.5% and 90.3% for the external sets (NBI and BLI, respectively).
Conclusions: The CAD achieved AUCs comparable with experts and similar results with NBI and BLI. Accurate CAD prediction was achievable, even when the predicted endoscopy imaging technology was not part of the training set.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.02.042 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!