Detection of small bowel tumor based on multi-scale curvelet analysis and fractal technology in capsule endoscopy

Liu, Gang; Yan, Guozheng; Kuang, Shuai; Wang, Yongbing

doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.01.021

Cited by 54 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Twenty-seven studies were dedicated to improving diagnostic accuracy in case of colorectal polyps or cancer. Nineteen studies focused on the diagnosis of premalignant or malignant lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract, [39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57] only 4 studies were limited to the small bowel, [58][59][60][61] and 3 studies assessed the entire digestive tract. [62][63][64] Twenty-four studies used specific validation techniques-mainly k-fold cross- validation.…”

Section: Analysis Of Malignant and Premalignant Lesionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Artificial Intelligence to Gastroenterology and Hepatology

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2010, substantial progress has been made in artificial intelligence (AI) and its application to medicine. AI is explored in gastroenterology for endoscopic analysis of lesions, in detection of cancer, and to facilitate the analysis of inflammatory lesions or gastrointestinal bleeding during wireless capsule endoscopy. AI is also tested to assess liver fibrosis and to differentiate patients with pancreatic cancer from those with pancreatitis. AI might also be used to establish prognoses of patients or predict their response to treatments, based on multiple factors. We review the ways in which AI may help physicians make a diagnosis or establish a prognosis and discuss its limitations, knowing that further randomized controlled studies will be required before the approval of AI techniques by the health authorities.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Malignant and Premalignant Lesionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Artificial Intelligence to Gastroenterology and Hepatology

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of the polyp/tumour detection methods reviewed in this subsection are presented in Figure 1. The highest results were reported by Liu et al [53], who achieved an accuracy of 97.3%. However, the dataset used is smaller than the one used by Hu et al [49], who achieved an accuracy of 92.4%.…”

Section: Polyp and Tumour Detection Methodsmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…From the neighbourhoods of these points, texture features, called Complete Local Binary Pattern (CLBP), are extracted. A more complex methodology was proposed by Liu et al [53] for small-bowel tumour detection. This methodology is based on both texture and colour analysis.…”

Section: Polyp and Tumour Detection Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The future of capsule endoscopy in clinical practice: from diagnostic to therapeutic experimental prototype capsules

Vasilakakis

Koulaouzidis

Marlicz

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Capsule endoscopy (CE) is indicated as a first-line clinical examination for the detection of small-bowel pathology, and there is an ever-growing drive for it to become a method for the screening of the entire gastrointestinal tract (GI). Although CE's main function is diagnosis, the research for therapeutic capabilities has intensified to make therapeutic capsule endoscopy (TCE) a target within reach. This manuscript presents the research evolution of CE and TCE through the last 5 years and describes notable problems, as well as clinical and technological challenges to overcome. This review also reports the state-of-the-art of capsule devices with a focus on CE research prototypes promising an enhanced diagnostic yield (DY) and treatment. Lastly, this article provides an overview of the research progress made in software for enhancing DY by increasing the accuracy of abnormality detection and lesion localisation. The future of capsule endoscopy-experimental devices for diagnosis and therapy Gastroenterology Review

show abstract

“…Although SMCE was as good as gastroscopy in investigative agreement, certain limitations of SMCE must be considered. First, SMCE examination time was longer than the time needed for gastroscopy (24 min to 7 min); however, in the future, the time required will be less when the image is automatically analyzed using artificial intelligence . SMCE requires less time than does a similar product, which requires approximately 30 min .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standing‐type magnetically guided capsule endoscopy versus gastroscopy for gastric examination: multicenter blinded comparative trial

Lai

Wang

Cai

et al. 2019

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To compare feasibility and safety after gastrointestinal checkup by standing‐type magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (SMCE) and conventional gastroscopy. Methods This was a prospective multicenter, blinded study that compared SMCE with gastroscopy in patients from April 2018 to July 2018. All patients first underwent SMCE and then subsequently had gastroscopy with i.v. anesthesia. We calculated the compliance rates of gastric lesion detection by SMCE using gastroscopy as the standard. Capsule retention rate, incidence of adverse events, and patient satisfaction were documented throughout the study. Results One hundred and sixty‐one patients who completed SMCE and gastroscopy were included in the analysis. Positive compliance rate among SMCE and gastroscopy was 92.0% (95% CI: 80.77%–97.78%). Negative compliance rate was 95.5% (89.80%, 98.52%). Moreover, overall compliance rate was 94.41% (89.65%, 97.41%). Sixty‐four pathological outcomes were identified. Of these 64 outcomes, 50 were detected by both procedures. The gastroscopy method neglected seven findings (such as five erosions, one polyp, and one ulcer). Furthermore, SMCE also overlooked seven lesions (i.e. one erosion, two polyps, one atrophy, and three submucosal tumors). Capsule retention or related adverse events were not reported. Conclusion Standing‐type magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy provides equivalent agreement with gastroscopy and may be useful for screening of gastric illnesses without any anesthesia.

show abstract

Detection of small bowel tumor based on multi-scale curvelet analysis and fractal technology in capsule endoscopy

Cited by 54 publications

References 26 publications

Application of Artificial Intelligence to Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Application of Artificial Intelligence to Gastroenterology and Hepatology

The future of capsule endoscopy in clinical practice: from diagnostic to therapeutic experimental prototype capsules

Standing‐type magnetically guided capsule endoscopy versus gastroscopy for gastric examination: multicenter blinded comparative trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About