Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-0573-1044
Development and validation of an automated algorithm to evaluate the abundance of bubbles in small bowel capsule endoscopy
Publication History
submitted 10 August 2017
accepted after revision 03 January 2018
Publication Date:
29 March 2018 (online)
Abstract
Background and study aims Bubbles can impair visualization of the small bowel (SB) mucosa during capsule endoscopy (CE). We aimed to develop and validate a computed algorithm that would allow evaluation of the abundance of bubbles in SB-CE still frames.
Patients and methods Two sets of 200 SB-CE normal still frames were created. Two experienced SB-CE readers analyzed both sets of images twice, in a random order. Each still frame was categorized as presenting with < 10 % or ≥ 10 % of bubbles. Reproducibility (κ), sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), receiver operating characteristic curve, and calculation time were measured for different algorithms (Grey-level of co-occurrence matrix [GLCM], fractal dimension, Hough transform, and speeded-up robust features [SURF]) using the experts’ analysis as reference. Algorithms with highest reproducibility, Se and Sp were then selected for a validation step on the second set of frames. Criteria for validation were κ = 1, Se ≥ 90 %, Sp ≥ 85 %, and a calculation time < 1 second.
Results Both SURF and GLCM algorithms had high operating points (Se and Sp over 90 %) and a perfect reproducibility (κ = 1). The validation step showed the GLCM detector strategy had the best diagnostic performances, with a Se of 95.79 %, a Sp of 95.19 %, and a calculation time of 0.037 seconds per frame.
Conclusion A computed algorithm based on a GLCM detector strategy had high diagnostic performance allowing assessment of the abundance of bubbles in SB-CE still frames. This algorithm could be of interest for clinical use (quality reporting) and for research purposes (objective comparison tool of different preparations).
-
References
- 1 Iddan G, Meron G, Glukhovsky A. et al. Wireless capsule endoscopy. Nature 2000; 405: 417
- 2 Pennazio M, Spada C, Eliakim R. et al. Small-bowel capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy for diagnosis and treatment of small-bowel disorders: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 352-376
- 3 Yung DE, Rondonotti E, Sykes C. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis: is bowel preparation still necessary in small bowel capsule endoscopy?. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 11: 979-993
- 4 Koulaouzidis A, Iakovidis DK, Karargyris A. et al. Optimizing lesion detection in small-bowel capsule endoscopy: from present problems to future solutions. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 9: 217-235
- 5 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G. et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-625
- 6 Van Weyenberg SJB, De Leest HTJI, Mulder CJJ. Description of a novel grading system to assess the quality of bowel preparation in video capsule endoscopy. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 406-411
- 7 Abou Ali E, Histace A, Camus A. et al. Development and validation of a highly sensitive and highly specific computed assessment of cleansing score for small bowel capsule endoscopy. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: A604
- 8 Albert J, Göbel CM, Lesske J. et al. Simethicone for small bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy: a systematic, single-blinded, controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 487-491
- 9 Wu L, Cao Y, Liao C. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of Simethicone for gastrointestinal endoscopic visibility. Scand J Gastroenterol 2011; 46: 227-235
- 10 Fang YH, Chen CX, Zhang BL. Effect of small bowel preparation with simethicone on capsule endoscopy. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2009; 10: 46-51
- 11 Spada C, Riccioni ME, Familiari P. et al. Polyethylene glycol plus simethicone in small-bowel preparation for capsule endoscopy. Dig Liver Dis 2010; 42: 365-370
- 12 Rosa BJ, Barbosa M, Magalhaes J. et al. Oral purgative and simethicone before small bowel capsule endoscopy. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 5: 67-73
- 13 Papamichael K, Karatzas P, Theodoropoulos I. et al. Simethicone adjunct to polyethylene glycol improves small bowel capsule endoscopy imaging in non-Crohnʼs disease patients. Ann Gastroenterol 2015; 28: 464-468
- 14 Keuchel M, Kurniawan N, Baltes P. et al. Quantitative measurements in capsule endoscopy. Comput Biol Med 2015; 65: 333-347
- 15 Koulaouzidis A, Giannakou A, Yung DE. et al. Do prokinetics influence the completion rate in small-bowel capsule endoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Med Res Opin 2013 Sep 29: 1171-1185
- 16 Brotz C, Nandi N, Conn M. et al. A validation study of 3 grading systems to evaluate small-bowel cleansing for wireless capsule endoscopy: a quantitative index, a qualitative evaluation, and an overall adequacy assessment. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 262-270
- 17 Klein A, Gizbar M, Bourke MJ. et al. Validated computed cleansing score for videocapsule endoscopy. Dig Endosc 2016; 28: 564-569
- 18 Hough PVC. Method and Means for Recognizing Complex Patterns. US Patent 3,069,654, 1962 Ser. No. 17,7156 Claims
- 19 Vilarino F, Malagelada C, Azpiroz F. et al. Categorization and segmentation of intestinal content frames for wireless capsule endoscopy. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2012; 16: 1341-1352
- 20 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174