← Issue №5/ week of Aug 2, 2026/Endoscopy

Artificial Intelligence Automated Assessment of Colonoscopy Quality Metrics.

From GI Signals issue №5: what this paper found, what it changes, and where it sits against the current standard of care, reviewed by Simon Mathews, MD.

Endoscopy prospective cohort · n=18,597 · Aug 1, 2026 · Am J Gastro · IF 9.8

Artificial Intelligence Automated Assessment of Colonoscopy Quality Metrics.

New evidenceartificial intelligenceendoscopy qualitycolonoscopycomputer-aided detection
Clinical takeawayNo clinical action yet: a validation study showing AI can measure colonoscopy quality metrics from videos, but not yet proven to improve outcomes.
What it foundAI-CQ tool correlated strongly with manual ADR (r=0.54), WT (r=0.91), and cold snare polypectomy rate (84.0%, range 63.0-95.3%).
ContextConfirms feasibility of automated quality measurement, which is currently manual and prone to documentation variability.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Gupta S, et al.), "Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2020

Decision at stakeassessing colonoscopy quality metrics for post-polypectomy surveillance decisions

After polyp removal, assign the next colonoscopy surveillance interval using USMSTF 2020 based on polyp number, size, and histology (e.g., 1-2 tubular adenomas <10 mm 7-10 years; 3-4 tubular adenomas <10 mm 3-5 years; 5-10 tubular adenomas <10 mm, any adenoma ≥10 mm, or adenoma with tubulovillous/villous histology or high-grade dysplasia 3 years; >10 adenomas 1 year with polyposis evaluation; and for serrated polyps, 1-2 sessile serrated lesions <10 mm 5-10 years, 3-4 sessile serrated lesions <10 mm or a hyperplastic polyp ≥10 mm 3-5 years, and a sessile serrated lesion ≥10 mm or with dysplasia or a traditional serrated adenoma 3 years), and apply the shortest interval indicated when findings are mixed.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

After polyp removal, assign the next colonoscopy surveillance interval using USMSTF 2020 based on polyp number, size, and histology (e.g., 1-2 tubular adenomas <10 mm 7-10 years; 3-4 tubular adenomas <10 mm 3-5 years; 5-10 tubular adenomas <10 mm, any adenoma ≥10 mm, or adenoma with tubulovillous/villous histology or high-grade dysplasia 3 years; >10 adenomas 1 year with polyposis evaluation; and for serrated polyps, 1-2 sessile serrated lesions <10 mm 5-10 years, 3-4 sessile serrated lesions <10 mm or a hyperplastic polyp ≥10 mm 3-5 years, and a sessile serrated lesion ≥10 mm or with dysplasia or a traditional serrated adenoma 3 years), and apply the shortest interval indicated when findings are mixed. Confirm complete resection and adequate prep before applying an interval, and use site-check/tumor-board pathways for piecemeal resection and malignant (T1) polyps. Refer for genetic evaluation when Lynch, FAP/AFAP/MAP, or serrated polyposis syndrome criteria are met.

US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Gupta S, et al.), "Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2020 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Keswani RN … Pandolfino JE · American Journal of Gastroenterology · IF 9.8 · PubMed ↗Permalink
← Read the whole of issue №5 Every paper GI Signals surfaces gets a page like this one. All issues