• Users Online:460
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 156-169

Pooled diagnostic parameters of artificial intelligence in EUS image analysis of the pancreas: A descriptive quantitative review

1 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
2 Gastroenterology Unit, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
3 Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
4 Department of Gastroenterology, Aster MIMS, Calicut, Kerala, India
5 Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
6 Department of Internal Medicine, Roanoke Medical Center, Roanoke, Virginia, USA
7 Department of Gastroenterology, CHI Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
8 Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, The Pancreas Institute, G. B. Rossi University Hospital, Verona, Italy
9 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
10 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sheikh Shahkbout Medical City, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Correspondence Address:
Babu P Mohan
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah Health, 30 N 1900 E, SOM 4R118, Salt Lake City, UT 84132
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/EUS-D-21-00063

Rights and Permissions

EUS is an important diagnostic tool in pancreatic lesions. Performance of single-center and/or single study artificial intelligence (AI) in the analysis of EUS-images of pancreatic lesions has been reported. The aim of this study was to quantitatively study the pooled rates of diagnostic performance of AI in EUS image analysis of pancreas using rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis methodology. Multiple databases were searched (from inception to December 2020) and studies that reported on the performance of AI in EUS analysis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma were selected. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates. In cases where multiple 2 × 2 contingency tables were provided for different thresholds, we assumed the data tables as independent from each other. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2% and 95% prediction intervals. Eleven studies were analyzed. The pooled overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 86% (95% confidence interval [82.8–88.6]), 90.4% (88.1–92.3), 84% (79.3–87.8), 90.2% (87.4–92.3) and 89.8% (86–92.7), respectively. On subgroup analysis, the corresponding pooled parameters in studies that used neural networks were 85.5% (80–89.8), 91.8% (87.8–94.6), 84.6% (73–91.7), 87.4% (82–91.3), and 91.4% (83.7–95.6)], respectively. Based on our meta-analysis, AI seems to perform well in the EUS-image analysis of pancreatic lesions.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded54    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal