Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative force in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, offering enhancements in diagnostic accuracy, lesion detection, and procedural efficiency. This systematic review consolidates current evidence from original research articles on AI applications across various endoscopic procedures, including colonoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), and capsule endoscopy. The review highlights AI’s performance in detecting colorectal polyps, gastric cancer, small bowel lesions, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). While AI demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity across multiple studies, challenges such as data heterogeneity, integration into clinical workflows, and the need for external validation persist. Future research should focus on large-scale, multicenter trials to validate AI’s efficacy in diverse clinical settings.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No Funding Receieved
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Dhangar P reviewed the draft.
Conflicts of interest We declare that we have no conflicts of interest.
Data sharing It will be made available to others upon request to the corresponding author.
Funding source None
Supportive foundations: None
Data Availability
All data produced are available online
