Vade Mecum in ERCP, a roadmap to success: Tips from experts for excelling in ERCP.

Background and study aims Training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is operator-dependent and traditionally, the apprenticeship model, in which experts are considered to be role models, has been adopted for it. The aim of this study was to develop a practical guide compiling tips from experts to help guide trainees to succeed in ERCP. Methods A web-based survey was created to understand the professional development of ERCP experts, the investments they made, the obstacles they overcame, and the quotes that guided their professional life. ERCP experts worldwide were invited to participate. Results Fifty-three experts (of 71; 74.6%) from 24 countries answered the survey. Experts started ERCP training early (average age 31 years; range, 24-52 years) and it often was combined with training for endoscopic ultrasound. A long training period (average 21 months; range, 3-120 months) was needed to achieve competence, frequently in another department, and it was commonly complemented with research in the field (76.5%). "Time and practice" were the most worthwhile investments they made to achieve success. "Sports" were an area outside endoscopy frequently considered to be important to acquire the skills necessary to excel in ERCP. "Lack of dedicated time for training" and "peer competition" were the biggest obstacles the experts faced. Several pieces of advice were given to the experts, such as to be resilient, careful, patient, responsible, and hard-working. "Personal life" was mentioned as an undeniably crucial factor for achieving long-term success that should not be forgotten. Conclusions This survey is the first to provide insight regarding the professional trajectory of renowned ERCP experts worldwide, providing valuable recommendations to help trainees excel in ERCP.

Curriculum for diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement.

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recognized the need to formalize and enhance training in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This manuscript represents the outcome of a formal Delphi process resulting in an official Position Statement of the ESGE and provides a framework to develop and maintain skills in diagnostic EUS. This curriculum is set out in terms of the prerequisites prior to training; the recommended steps of training to a defined syllabus; the quality of training; and how competence should be defined and evidenced before independent practice. 1: Trainees should have achieved competence in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy before training in diagnostic EUS. 2: The development of diagnostic EUS skills by methods that do not involve patients is advisable, but not mandatory, prior to commencing formal training in diagnostic EUS. 3: A trainee's principal trainer should be performing adequate volumes of diagnostic EUSs to demonstrate maintenance of their own competence. 4: Training centers for diagnostic EUS should offer expertise, as well as a high volume of procedures per year, to ensure an optimal level of quality for training. Under these conditions, training centers should be able to provide trainees with a sufficient wealth of experience in diagnostic EUS for at least 12 months. 5: Trainees should engage in formal training and supplement this with a range of learning resources for diagnostic EUS, including EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (FNA/FNB). 6: EUS training should follow a structured syllabus to guide the learning program. 7: A minimum procedure volume should be offered to trainees during diagnostic EUS training to ensure that they have the opportunity to achieve competence in the technique. To evaluate competence in diagnostic EUS, trainees should have completed a minimum of 250 supervised EUS procedures: 80 for luminal tumors, 20 for subepithelial lesions, and 150 for pancreaticobiliary lesions. At least 75 EUS-FNA/FNBs should be performed, including mostly pancreaticobiliary lesions. 8: Competence assessment in diagnostic EUS should take into consideration not only technical skills, but also cognitive and integrative skills. A reliable valid assessment tool should be used regularly during diagnostic EUS training to track the acquisition of competence and to support trainee feedback. 9: A period of supervised practice should follow the start of independent activity. Supervision can be delivered either on site if other colleagues are already practicing EUS or by maintaining contacts with the training center and/or other EUS experts. 10: Key performance measures including the annual number of procedures, frequency of obtaining a diagnostic sample during EUS-FNA/FNB, and adverse events should be recorded within an electronic documentation system and evaluated.

Face and content validity of a biological papilla designed for the Boskoski-Costamagna ERCP simulator.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A biological papilla made of chicken heart tissue, incorporated into the Boskoski-Costamagna ERCP Trainer simulator, was recently designed to allow training in sphincterotomy. This study aimed to evaluate the face and content validity of this tool. METHOD: Participants from 2 groups (nonexperienced and experienced [<600 or >600 lifetime ERCPs, respectively]) were invited to perform standardized assignments on the model: sphincterotomy and precut for both groups and papillectomy for the experienced group. Following these assignments, all participants filled out a questionnaire to rate their appreciation of the realism of the model, and experienced endoscopists were also asked to evaluate its didactic value using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: A total of 19 participants were included (nonexperienced, n = 10; experienced, n = 9). Parameters regarding the realism of the tool in terms of general appearance, sphincterotomy, precut, and papillectomy were overall considered realistic (4 of 5), with good agreement rates in terms of overall realism between groups. Experienced operators reported the highest realism for "positioning the scope and needle-knife in the field of view" and "during precut," "cutting in small increments during precut," and "controlling the scope during papillectomy," and they highly agreed that this papilla should be included for training novice and intermediate trainees in sphincterotomy, precut, and papillectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show good face validity and excellent content validity of this biological papilla combined with the Boskoski-Costamagna ERCP Trainer. This new tool provides a useful, inexpensive, versatile, and easy tool for training regarding sphincterotomy, precut, and papillectomy. Future studies should explore whether including this model in real-life training improves the learning curve of endoscopy trainees.

Impact of center and endoscopist ERCP volume on ERCP outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist experience and center volume might be associated with ERCP outcomes, as in other fields of endoscopy and in surgery. An effort to assess this relationship is important to improve practice. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate these comparative data and to assess the impact of endoscopist and center volume on ERCP procedure outcomes. METHODS: We performed a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus through March 2022. Volume classification included high- and low-volume (HV and LV) endoscopists and centers. The primary outcome was the impact of endoscopist and center volume on ERCP success. Secondary outcomes were the overall adverse event (AE) rate and the specific AE rate. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data synthesis was obtained by direct meta-analyses using a random-effects model; results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 6833 relevant publications, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Procedure success was higher among HV endoscopists (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.59-2.06; I2 = 57%) and in HV centers (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.22-2.57; I2 = 67%). The overall AE rate was lower for procedures performed by HV endoscopists (OR, .71; 95% CI, .61-.82; I2 = 38%) and in HV centers (OR, .70; 95% CI, .51-.97; I2 = 92%). Bleeding was less frequent in procedures performed by HV endoscopists (OR, .67; 95% CI, .48-.95; I2 = 37%) but did not differ based on center volume (OR, .68; 95% CI, .24-1.90; I2 = 89%). No statistical differences were detected concerning pancreatitis, cholangitis, and perforation rates. CONCLUSIONS: HV endoscopists and centers provide higher ERCP success rates with fewer overall AEs, especially bleeding, compared with respective LV comparators.