Intelligent difficulty scoring and assistance system for endoscopic extraction of common bile duct stones based on deep learning: multicenter study
Background The study aimed to construct an intelligent difficulty scoring and assistance system (DSAS) for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones.
Methods 1954 cholangiograms were collected from three hospitals for training and testing the DSAS. The D-LinkNet34 and U-Net were adopted to segment the CBD, stones, and duodenoscope. Based on the segmentation results, the stone size, distal CBD diameter, distal CBD arm, and distal CBD angulation were estimated. The performance of segmentation and estimation was assessed by mean intersection over union (mIoU) and average relative error. A technical difficulty scoring scale, which was used for assessing the technical difficulty of CBD stone removal, was developed and validated. We also analyzed the relationship between scores evaluated by the DSAS and clinical indicators including stone clearance rate and need for endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation (EPLBD) and lithotripsy.
Results The mIoU values of the stone, CBD, and duodenoscope segmentation were 68.35 %, 86.42 %, and 95.85 %, respectively. The estimation performance of the DSAS was superior to nonexpert endoscopists. In addition, the technical difficulty scoring performance of the DSAS was more consistent with expert endoscopists than two nonexpert endoscopists. A DSAS assessment score ≥ 2 was correlated with lower stone clearance rates and more frequent EPLBD.
Conclusions An intelligent DSAS based on deep learning was developed. The DSAS could assist endoscopists by automatically scoring the technical difficulty of CBD stone extraction, and guiding the choice of therapeutic approach and appropriate accessories during ERCP.
* These authors contributed equally to this work.
Received: 14 March 2020
Accepted: 21 August 2020
24 August 2020 (online)
© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
- 1 Tazuma S. Gallstone disease: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and classification of biliary stones (common bile duct and intrahepatic). Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2006; 20: 1075-1083
- 2 Galeazzi M, Mazzola P, Valcarcel B. et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the elderly: results of a retrospective study and a geriatricians’ point of view. BMC Gastroenterol 2018; 18: 38
- 3 Evans N, Buxbaum JL. Endoscopic treatment of ERCP-related duodenal perforation. Tech Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 21: 83-90
- 4 Buxbaum JL, Abbas FehmiSM. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 1075-1105
- 5 Manes G, Paspatis G, Aabakken L. Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 472-491
- 6 Williams E, Beckingham I, El Sayed G. et al. Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Gut 2017; 66: 765-782
- 7 Park SJ, Kim JH, Hwang JC. et al. Factors predictive of adverse events following endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation: results from a multicenter series. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58: 1100-1109
- 8 Stefanidis G, Viazis N, Pleskow D. et al. Large balloon dilation vs. mechanical lithotripsy for the management of large bile duct stones: a prospective randomized study. . Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 278-285
- 9 Paspatis GA, Konstantinidis K, Tribonias G. et al. Sixty- versus thirty-seconds papillary balloon dilation after sphincterotomy for the treatment of large bile duct stones: a randomized controlled trial. Dig Liver Dis 2013; 45: 301-304
- 10 Teoh AY, Cheung FK, Hu B. et al. Randomized trial of endoscopic sphincterotomy with balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy alone for removal of bile duct stones. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 341-345.e1
- 11 Kim HJ, Choi HS, Park JH. et al. Factors influencing the technical difficulty of endoscopic clearance of bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 1154-1160
- 12 Lecun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton GE. Deep learning. Nature 2015; 521: 436-444
- 13 Torkamani A, Andersen KG, Steinhubl SR. et al. High-definition medicine. Cell 2017; 170: 828-843
- 14 Wu L, Zhang J, Zhou W. et al. Randomised controlled trial of WISENSE, a real-time quality improving system for monitoring blind spots during esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Gut 2019; 68: 2161-2169
- 15 Shelhamer E, Long J, Darrell T. Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 2017; 39: 640-651
- 16 Ouhmich F, Agnus V, Noblet V. et al. Liver tissue segmentation in multiphase CT scans using cascaded convolutional neural networks. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2019; 14: 1275-1284
- 17 Brandao P, Mazomenos EB, Ciuti G. et al. Fully convolutional neural networks for polyp segmentation in colonoscopy. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng 2017; 10134 DOI: org/10.1117/12.2254361.
- 18 Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T. U-Net: convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. Navab N, Hornegger J, Wells W, Frangi A. Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention – MICCAI 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer; DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28
- 19 Kim HJ, Choi HS, Park JH. et al. Factors influencing the technical difficulty of endoscopic clearance of bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 1154-1160
- 20 Ragunath K, Thomas L, Cheung W. Objective evaluation of ERCP procedures: a simple grading scale for evaluating technical difficulty. Postgrad Med J 2002; 79: 467-470
- 21 Scheker LR. What predicts failed cannulation and therapy at ERCP? Results of a large-scale multicenter analysis. . Endoscopy 2012; 44: 674-683
- 22 Schutz SM, Abbott RM. Grading ERCPs by degree of difficulty: a new concept to produce more meaningful outcome data. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 535-539
- 23 Haseeb A, Freeman ML. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for treatment of bile duct stones. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol 2019; 17: 221-230
- 24 Rutter M, Senore C, Bisschops R. et al. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement Initiative: developing performance measures. Endoscopy 2015; 48: 81-89
- 25 Jiang H, Learned-Miller E. Face detection with the Faster R-CNN. arXiv.org; 2016
- 26 Mchenry L, Lehman GA. Difficult bile duct stones. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol 2006; 9: 123-132
- 27 Manes G, Paspatis G, Aabakken L. et al. Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 472-491
- 28 Heo JH, Kang DH, Jung HJ. et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bile-duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 720-726
- 29 Stefanidis G, Viazis N, Pleskow D. et al. Large balloon dilation vs. mechanical lithotripsy for the management of large bile duct stones: a prospective randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 278-285