Organizations: College of Biomedical Engineering, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China · Department of Endoscopy, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China · Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China · Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Shanghai 200032, China
Colonoscopy video generation delivers dynamic, information-rich data critical for diagnosing intestinal diseases, particularly in data-scarce scenarios. High-quality video generation demands temporal consistency and precise control over clinical attributes, but faces challenges from irregular intestinal structures, diverse disease representations, and various imaging modalities. To this end, we propose ColoDiff, a diffusion-based framework that generates dynamic-consistent and content-aware colonoscopy videos, aiming to alleviate data shortage and assist clinical analysis. At the inter-frame level, our TimeStream module decouples temporal dependency from video sequences through a cross-frame tokenization mechanism, enabling intricate dynamic modeling despite irregular intestinal structures. At the intra-frame level, our Content-Aware module incorporates noise-injected embeddings and learnable prototypes to realize precise control over clinical attributes, breaking through the coarse guidance of diffusion models. Additionally, ColoDiff employs a non-Markovian sampling strategy that cuts steps by over 90% for real-time generation. ColoDiff is evaluated across three public datasets and one hospital database, based on both generation metrics and downstream tasks including disease diagnosis, modality discrimination, bowel preparation scoring, and lesion segmentation. Extensive experiments show ColoDiff generates videos with smooth transitions and rich dynamics. ColoDiff presents an effort in controllable colonoscopy video generation, revealing the potential of synthetic videos in complementing authentic representation and mitigating data scarcity in clinical settings.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: (a) - (b) Colonoscopy video analysis serves as an important diagnostic approach, integrating diverse imaging modalities and disease manifestations. (c) - (e) Existing challenges for colonoscopy video generation.
Fig. 2: The overall workflow of ColoDiff. E and D denote pre-trained encoder and decoder in VAE, respectively. zt represents the latent features that have been added noise. The light red area shows how the TimeStream module decouples temporal information, and the light blue area shows how the Content-Aware module controls generation process.
Type
Method
Colonoscopic [ 25 ]
HyperKvasir [ 2 ]
SUN-SEG [ 4 ]
Hospital Data
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
GAN-based
StyleGAN-V [ 20 ]
2111
226.1
2.12
729
88.5
1.98
682
46.5
3.91
703
51.7
3.42
MoStGAN-V [ 21 ]
469
53.2
3.37
607
29.4
2.74
412
28.6
4.04
522
46.6
3.59
Diffusion-based
LVDM [ 18 ]
1037
96.9
1.93
528
49.7
2.15
387
35.9
3.77
416
40.3
3.12
Endora [ 22 ]
461
13.4
3.90
496
19.6
3.29
375
17.8
4.59
389
23.2
3.65
FEAT-L [ 23 ]
351
12.3
4.01
511
21.2
3.27
356
13.6
4.61
402
18.9
3.88
TABLE I: Quantitative Comparison With SOTA Algorithms. Best Results Are in Bold .
Category
Colitis
Polyp
Adenoma
Metric
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
FVD ↓
FID ↓
IS ↑
Temporal Coherence
Transformer Encoder Layer
518
29.1
3.37
501
22.9
3.61
655
32.9
3.15
TimeStream Module
372
16.4
3.92
316
11.8
4.08
328
17.5
3.79
Content Controllability
One-hot Encoding
491
20.9
3.71
430
14.3
3.85
581
25.3
3.46
Random Encoding
486
21.6
3.64
446
15.1
3.79
567
25.8
3.50
Learnable Prototypes
390
17.7
3.81
341
13.6
3.85
396
20.8
3.55
TABLE II: Ablation Experiment Results for TimeStream And Content-Aware Modules. Best Results Are in Bold .
Fig. 3: Visual comparison of generated videos on Colonoscopic dataset [ 25 ] . (a) Videos generated by other compared methods. The blue boxes indicate regions that exhibit corresponding issues. Row 1: anatomical and textural visual distortion. Row 2: limited content variation. Rows 3-5: inter-frame incoherence. (b) Videos generated by ColoDiff.
Time
If
FID ↓
Inference
Frame
Steps
Markovian
Colitis
Polyp
Adenoma
Time (s)
Rate
T =250
Yes
16.4
11.8
17.5
13.46
1.19
T =100
No
16.7
12.3
17.9
5.17
3.09
T =50
No
17.1
12.5
18.4
2.61
6.13
T =10
No
17.5
13.1
18.7
0.49
32.65
T =5
No
19.3
14.2
21.6
0.24
66.67
TABLE III: Ablation Experiment Results for Non-Markovian Sampling Strategy. The Inference Time Column Indicates The Time Required to Generate A 16-frame Video.
Fig. 4: Examples of videos generated by ColoDiff under different resolution settings. For uniform display, slight stretching deformation is applied to the original images.
Fig. 5: The experimental results of Turing test and Consistency test.
Metric
Disease
Modality
BBPS
Colitis
Polyp
Adenoma
WLI
NBI
0-1
2-3
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Precision ↑
79.2
85.9
85.3
92.8
73.5
81.0
88.4
93.7
93.1
96.8
86.7
90.3
87.5
93.8
Recall ↑
82.1
87.4
87.7
89.1
76.8
83.4
91.2
96.3
90.6
93.7
89.2
92.6
85.3
91.8
F1-score ↑
80.6
86.6
86.5
90.9
75.1
82.2
89.8
95.0
91.8
95.2
87.9
91.4
86.4
92.8
Accuracy ↑
79.8
85.8
85.4
91.7
74.3
83.1
90.2
94.4
91.8
95.1
88.5
92.1
86.6
92.5
TABLE IV: Quantitative Results for Downstream Classification Tasks (Unit: %). For Paired Metrics, Models Trained With Real Videos (Left) vs. Real + Synthetic Videos (Right) Are Compared. Better Results Are in Bold .
Fig. 6: UMAP visualization for downstream classification tasks on test sets, with the left column representing models trained with original training set, and the right column representing models trained with an equal number of synthetic videos added.
Fig. 7: Visualized examples of downstream classification performance.
Metric
Test-Easy (Seen)
Test-Easy (Unseen)
Test-Hard (Seen)
Test-Hard (Unseen)
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Original
+Synthetic
Dice ↑
91.2
93.6
81.3
86.5
84.5
90.7
72.9
84.1
mIoU ↑
89.3
91.5
80.4
85.2
88.1
92.6
77.4
86.8
Precision ↑
89.9
93.3
80.8
83.1
84.9
96.1
78.0
86.3
Recall ↑
92.5
93.9
81.8
90.2
84.1
85.9
68.4
82.0
TABLE V: Quantitative Results for Downstream Segmentation Tasks (Unit: %). For Paired Metrics, Models Trained With Real Videos (Left) vs. Real + Synthetic Videos (Right) Are Compared. Better Results Are in Bold .
Fig. 8: Representative examples of downstream segmentation performance. Translucent blue regions indicate the ground truth, red contours denote results without generated data for training, and green contours show results after integrating generated data for training.
College of Biomedical Engineering, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China · Key Laboratory of Medical Imaging Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention of Shanghai, Shanghai 200032, China · Department of Endoscopy, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China +4
Department of Mathematics, University of Padova, Padova, Italy · LTCI, Telecom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France · Cosmo Intelligent Medical Devices, Dublin, Ireland