Artificial intelligence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: what detection rates cannot tell us

Impact of real-time artificial intelligence integration on detection of gastric lesions: an exploratory single-center before-and-after study using low-definition routine endoscopyPost hoc analysis indicates that real-time AI modestly improves detection of subcentimeter (≤0.5 cm) gastric lesionsdespite lesion size not being predefined-suggesting AI may help mitigate visual blind spots in routine endoscopy.Example images of the detection results.(A-F) Gastric lesions detected by endoscopy using AI so ware.LDR, lesion detection rate; BDR, benign detection rate; MDR, malignancy detection rate.Lesion detected (by size) ≤0.5 cm 269 166 >0.5 cm, ≤1.0 cm 316 153 >1.0 cm, ≤1.5 cm 9 6 >1.5 cm 76 36 Overall LDR 1.15 1.20 0.035 LDR (by size) ≤0.5 cm 0.18 0.20 <0.05 >0.5 cm, ≤1.0 cm 0.21 0.18 0.11 >1.0 cm, ≤1.5 cm 0.006 0.007 0.73 >1.5 cm 0.051 0.043 0.51 Biopsy performed (n, %) 242 (13.8) 81 (8.5) <0.05 Biopsy result Benign (BDR) 213 (0.124) 59 (0.058) <0.05 Malignant (MDR) 26 (0.015) 10 (0.01) 0.32

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Endoscopy
Published
2026-09-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2026.328
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Artificial intelligence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: what detection rates cannot tell us

Joon Sung Kim
Clinical Endoscopy
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
article

Artificial intelligence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: what detection rates cannot tell us

Joon Sung Kim
article en

Abstract

Impact of real-time artificial intelligence integration on detection of gastric lesions: an exploratory single-center before-and-after study using low-definition routine endoscopyPost hoc analysis indicates that real-time AI modestly improves detection of subcentimeter (≤0.5 cm) gastric lesionsdespite lesion size not being predefined-suggesting AI may help mitigate visual blind spots in routine endoscopy.Example images of the detection results.(A-F) Gastric lesions detected by endoscopy using AI so ware.LDR, lesion detection rate; BDR, benign detection rate; MDR, malignancy detection rate.Lesion detected (by size) ≤0.5 cm 269 166 >0.5 cm, ≤1.0 cm 316 153 >1.0 cm, ≤1.5 cm 9 6 >1.5 cm 76 36 Overall LDR 1.15 1.20 0.035 LDR (by size) ≤0.5 cm 0.18 0.20 <0.05 >0.5 cm, ≤1.0 cm 0.21 0.18 0.11 >1.0 cm, ≤1.5 cm 0.006 0.007 0.73 >1.5 cm 0.051 0.043 0.51 Biopsy performed (n, %) 242 (13.8) 81 (8.5) <0.05 Biopsy result Benign (BDR) 213 (0.124) 59 (0.058) <0.05 Malignant (MDR) 26 (0.015) 10 (0.01) 0.32

Clinical Endoscopy
The Catholic University of Korea Incheon St. Mary's Hospital (KR), Catholic University of Korea (KR)
Korea International Cooperation Agency
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Artificial intelligence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: what detection rates cannot tell us — Joon Sung Kim · Clinical Endoscopy (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS