Artificial intelligence-based endoscopic virtual ruler to measure the diameter of esophageal varices (with video)
10.3760/cma.j.cn321463-20250826-00341
- VernacularTitle:基于人工智能的内镜虚拟标尺测量食管静脉曲张直径的初步研究（含视频）
- Author:
Chuankun CAO
1
;
Jing JIN
;
Heng ZHANG
;
Rui CAI
;
Ting XIAO
;
Xuecan MEI
;
Derun KONG
Author Information
1. 安徽医科大学第一附属医院消化内科 安徽省消化系统疾病重点实验室，合肥 230022
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Endoscopy;
Esophageal varices;
Artificial intelligence;
Esophageal varix manometer;
Portal hypertension
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy
2025;42(11):848-852
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence-based endoscopic virtual ruler (EVR) for non-invasive measurement of esophageal varices (EV) diameter.Methods:Patients with liver cirrhosis and EV hospitalized at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University between October 2022 and May 2023 were prospectively enrolled. EV diameter was measured using visual estimation, esophageal varix manometer (EVM), and EVR, with procedure times recorded. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the consistency of EV diameter measurement obtained from the three methods, and repeated-measures ANOVA was used to compare differences in time measurements across three methods.Results:The study included 41 patients with liver cirrhosis and EV. Inter-observer ICC for visual estimation was 0.594, versus 0.840 for EVM and 0.884 for EVR. The ICC value between the EV diameters measured by EVR and EVM was higher than that of the visual assessment. The ICC value between EV diameter measurement by EVM and EVR was 0.991. Measurement times differed significantly across methods ( P<0.001): visual estimation 18.6±2.2 s (14.7-23.3 s), EVR 41.5±4.1 s (31.7-50.3 s), and EVM 170.8±26.4 s (129.3-229.3 s). Repeated measures analysis of variance (corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser) revealed significant differences in time across the three measurement methods [ F(1.033, 41.313)=1 233.800, P<0.001]. Subsequent Bonferroni post-hoc tests revealed significant differences in time between all method pairs ( P<0.001). Conclusion:EVR provides rapid, non-invasive EV diameter measurements with excellent agreement to EVM assessment, offering an efficient alternative to conventional techniques.
