Narrative review demonstrates that artificial intelligence improves adenoma detection and characterization during colonoscopy, highlighting the need for standardized real-world validation.
Background: Colonoscopy is the gold-standard screening modality for colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention, enabling detection and endoscopic resection of premalignant polyps and reducing CRC incidence and mortality by up to 77% and 53%, respectively. However, colonoscopy effectiveness is substantially dependent on endoscopist expertise, with significant inter-operator variability in adenoma detection rates (ADR) and, consequently, a risk of missed lesions, particularly diminutive and morphologically subtle adenomas. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI), specifically computer-aided detection (CADe) and computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems utilizing deep learning convolutional neural networks, have emerged as promising technologies to standardize lesion detection accuracy and reduce adenoma miss rates. Methods: A focused narrative literature review was conducted examining randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and implementation studies evaluating AI-assisted colonoscopy systems across diverse clinical populations and healthcare settings. Results: Evidence demonstrates that CADe systems consistently improve ADR, particularly for diminutive polyps and morphologically challenging lesions, though superiority over expert endoscopists remains inconsistent. CADx systems reliably meet ASGE-PIVI performance thresholds for diminutive polyp characterization, supporting implementation of resect-and-discard and diagnose-and-leave strategies. However, substantial heterogeneity exists regarding real-world effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and optimal implementation frameworks across diverse settings. Conclusions: While AI-assisted colonoscopy demonstrates clinical promise in improving lesion detection and enabling optical diagnosis, realizing durable population-level benefit requires the establishment of standardized validation methodologies, large-scale pragmatic trials with patient-centered outcomes, robust regulatory frameworks, and equitable implementation strategies addressing health disparities globally.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Antzoulas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: