Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2025 Oct;10(10):915-923.
doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(25)00140-2.

Safety of artificial intelligence-assisted optical diagnosis for leaving colorectal polyps in situ during colonoscopy (PRACTICE): a non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Safety of artificial intelligence-assisted optical diagnosis for leaving colorectal polyps in situ during colonoscopy (PRACTICE): a non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial

Giulio Antonelli et al. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Guidelines recommend leaving in situ rectosigmoid polyps diagnosed during colonoscopy that are 5 mm or smaller if the endoscopist optically predicts them to be non-neoplastic. However, no randomised controlled trial has been done to examine the efficacy and safety of this strategy.

Methods: This open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial enrolled adults age 18 years or older undergoing colonoscopy for screening, surveillance, or clinical indications across four Italian centres. Eligible patients were randomised 1:1 (with stratification by patient sex, age, and previous adenoma removal) via a central web-based system, to either the leave-in-situ group, in which endoscopists could leave non-neoplastic lesions in place after optical diagnosis, or the resect-all group, in which all detected polyps were systematically removed, regardless of optical diagnosis. Patients and endoscopists were not masked to group allocation but pathologists and investigators assessing outcomes were masked. All procedures in both groups were done with the assistance of a computer-aided detection and diagnosis system. Endoscopists optically diagnosed lesions through a combination of white light, blue light, and computer-aided detection. The primary outcome was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of participants with at least one adenoma detected (per-patient analysis), assessed by intention-to-treat, to determine whether the leave-in-situ strategy was non-inferior to the resect-all approach, with an absolute 10% non-inferiority margin. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05500248) and is completed.

Findings: Between Oct 1, 2022, and April 30, 2024, 1147 patients were recruited and 895 patients (507 [57%] females, 388 [43%] males, mean age 61·1 years [SD 9·8]) were randomly assigned to either the leave-in-situ group (n=441) or resect-all group (n=454). 197 adenomas or colorectal cancers were detected in the leave-in-situ group and 211 in the resect-all group; the ADR was 44·7% (95% CI 40·4 to 49·5) in the leave-in-situ group and 46·5% (41·8 to 51·2) in the resect-all group (absolute difference -1·8 percentage points, 95% CI -8·9 to 4·9; pnon-inferiority=0·013). No colonoscopy-related complications, including perforation and bleeding, were reported in either group.

Interpretation: The leave-in-situ strategy through optical diagnosis with computer-assisted diagnosis support does not reduce oncological safety of colonoscopy, as measured by ADR. By reducing unnecessary polypectomies, this strategy could be considered as an attractive option in colonoscopy practice.

Funding: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests GAnt reports consulting fees from Olympus, Cosmo IMD, Odin Vision, and Medtronic and receiving payment or honoraria from Medtronic, Alphasigma, and Aurorabiopharma. YM reports receiving royalties or having licences from Cybernet System; receiving consulting fees from Olympus; and receiving payment or honoraria from Olympus. CH reports consultancy for Fujifilm, Olympus, and Medtronic. AR reports consultancy for Fujifilm, Olympus, and Medtronic. DKR reports grants or contracts from Boston Scientific, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Olympus, and Erbe and receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Olympus Corporation, and Erbe. PS reports grants or contracts from Erbe, Fujifilm, NEC, and Sebela and consulting fees from Olympus, Boston Scientific, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Cipla, Medtronic, Takeda, Samsung Bioepis, and CDx. DVR reports grants or contracts from Erbe, Boston Scientific, and Fujifilm and consulting fees from Erbe, Boston Scientific, Fujifilm, and Ventage. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data