UK and Ireland Joint Advisory Group (JAG) consensus statements for training and certification in diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: International endoscopy societies vary in their approach for credentialing individuals in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to enable independent practice; however, there is no consensus in this or its implementation. In 2019, the Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy (JAG) commissioned a working group to examine the evidence relating to this process for EUS. The aim of this was to develop evidence-based recommendations for EUS training and certification in the UK. METHODS: Under the oversight of the JAG quality assurance team, a modified Delphi process was conducted which included major stakeholders from the UK and Ireland. A formal literature review was made, initial questions for study were proposed and recommendations for training and certification in EUS were formulated after a rigorous assessment using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool and subjected to electronic voting to identify accepted statements. These were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholder societies before consensus on the final EUS certification pathway was achieved. RESULTS: 39 initial questions were proposed of which 33 were deemed worthy of assessment and finally formed the key recommendations. The statements covered four key domains, such as: definition of competence (13 statements), acquisition of competence (10), assessment of competence (5) and postcertification mentorship (5). Key recommendations include: (1) minimum of 250 hands-on cases before an assessment for competency can be made, (2) attendance at the JAG basic EUS course, (3) completing a minimum of one formative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) every 10 cases to allow the learning curve in EUS training to be adequately studied, (4) competent performance in summative DOPS assessments and (5) a period of mentorship over a 12-month period is recommended as minimum to support and mentor new service providers. CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-based certification pathway has been commissioned by JAG to support and quality assure EUS training. This will form the basis to improve quality of training and safety standards in EUS in the UK and Ireland.

Erratum: UK Joint Advisory Group consensus statements for training and certification in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1629-7540.].

UK Joint Advisory Group consensus statements for training and certification in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Background and study aims Despite the high-risk nature of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), a robust and standardized credentialing process to ensure competency before independent practice is lacking worldwide. On behalf of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), we aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations to form the framework of ERCP training and certification in the UK. Methods Under the oversight of the JAG, a modified Delphi process was conducted with stakeholder representation from the British Society of Gastroenterology, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, trainees and trainers. Recommendations on ERCP training and certification were formulated after formal literature review and appraised using the GRADE tool. These were subjected to electronic voting to achieve consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by JAG and relevant Specialist Advisory Committees before incorporation into the ERCP certification pathway. Results In total, 27 recommendation statements were generated for the following domains: definition of competence (9 statements), acquisition of competence (8 statements), assessment of competence (6 statements) and post-certification support (4 statements). The consensus process led to the following criteria for ERCP certification: 1) performing ≥ 300 hands-on procedures; 2) attending a JAG-accredited ERCP skills course; 3) in modified Schutz 1-2 procedures: achieving native papilla cannulation rate ≥80%, complete bile duct clearance ≥ 70 %, successful stenting of distal biliary strictures ≥ 75 %, physically unassisted in ≥ 80 % of cases; 4) 30-day post-ERCP pancreatitis rates ≤5 %; and 5) satisfactory performance in formative and summative direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) assessments. Conclusions JAG certification in ERCP has been developed following evidence-based consensus to quality assure training and to ultimately improve future standards of ERCP practice.

Endoscopy training in the UK pre-COVID-19 environment: a multidisciplinary survey of endoscopy training and the experience of reciprocal feedback.

OBJECTIVE: Training in gastrointestinal endoscopy in the UK occurs predominantly in a real world one-to-one trainer to trainee interaction. Previous surveys have shown surgical and gastroenterology trainees have had mixed experiences of supervision and training, and no surveys have explored specifically the role of trainee to trainer feedback. This study aimed to explore the experience of training and of providing trainer feedback for all disciplines of endoscopy trainees. DESIGN/METHOD: An online survey designed in collaboration with Joint Advisory Committee training committee and trainee representatives was distributed from January 2020 but was interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic and hence terminated early. RESULTS: There were 129 responses, including trainees from all disciplines and regions, of which 86/129 (66.7%) rated the culture in their endoscopy units favourably-either good or excellent. 65/129 (50.4%) trainees reported having one or more training lists allocated per week, with 41/129 (31.8%) reporting only ad hoc lists. 100/129 (77.5%) respondents were given feedback and 97/129 (75.2%) were provided with learning points from the list. 65/129 (50.4%) respondents reported their trainer completed a direct observation of procedure or direct observation of polypectomies. 73/129 (56.6%) respondents reported that they felt able to give feedback to their trainer, with 88/129 (68.2%) feeling they could do this accurately. Barriers to trainer feedback cited included time constraints, lack of anonymity and concerns about affecting the trainer-trainee relationship. CONCLUSION: Overall, the training environment has improved since previous surveys. There are still issues around interdisciplinary differences with some surgical trainees finding the training environment less welcoming, and trainee perceptions of hierarchical barriers and trainer responsiveness to feedback limiting the accuracy of their feedback.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided ethanol and radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic insulinomas: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Insulinoma is the most common neuroendocrine neoplasm of the pancreas, characterised by hypoglycaemic symptoms. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) and ethanol ablation (EUS-EA) are novel methods for treating insulinoma.We aimed to perform a systematic review to assess the efficacy and safety of EUS-guided ablation techniques for pancreatic insulinomas. METHODS: We systematically searched for articles detailing EUS-guided ablations of insulinomas. We performed a qualitative analysis and summarised data on the efficacy and safety of EUS-RFA and EUS-EA techniques. RESULTS: In total, we identified 35 case reports and case series describing 75 patients with insulinomas treatment with EUS-guided ablation. Twenty-seven patients were treated with EUS-RFA, 47 patients with EUS-EA, and 1 patient received EUS-EA and EUS-RFA in the same session. In total, 84 insulinomas were ablated (EUS-RFA: 31, EUS-EA: 53). Most insulinomas were in the head of the pancreas (40%). The clinical success rate for EUS-guided ablation techniques was 98.5%. The median glucose level was 1.95 (Q1-Q3: 1.69-2.13) mmol/L before ablation compared to 6.20 (Q1-Q3: 5.30-7.05) mmol/L after treatment. The median insulin and C-peptide levels before and after RFA/EA were 230 (Q1-Q2: 120-257) pmol/L and 41 (Q1-Q2 35-42) pmol/L; 2077 (Q1-Q2 1644-2459) pmol/L and 819 (Q1-Q2 696-1072) pmol/L, respectively. There were eleven adverse events: seven abdominal pain, two mild acute pancreatitis, one necrotising acute pancreatitis and one local hematoma. All patients recovered, and there were no periprocedural deaths. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided ablation of insulinoma seems to be a safe and effective treatment and is an alternative to surgical resection in selected cases.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy for nonampullary duodenal lesions: indications and results.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex procedure, associated with a definite risk of mortality and 30-50% risk of complications. For nonampullary duodenal lesions, PD can carry a higher morbidity as they are more commonly associated with a soft pancreas and narrow-calibre main pancreatic ducts. It is therefore paramount that the risks and benefits of surgery are considered carefully in this group of patients. A preoperative histological diagnosis for duodenal lesions is normally achieved by endoscopic biopsy. In this study, we aim to assess the outcome of PD in patients with nonampullary duodenal lesions and correlate the preoperative endoscopic histology work-up with the definitive postoperative pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed a prospectively collected PD database from January 2007 to December 2013. Demographic and clinical data were included. Preoperative endoscopic histology was compared with final specimen histology to assess concordance. RESULTS: Forty patients (55% women, mean age 69.4 years, range 45-83 years) underwent PD for duodenal lesions over a 7-year time period. The most common presenting symptom was epigastric pain (32.5%), followed by anaemia (20%). Overall, the complication rate was 55%, with the most frequent adverse event being pancreatic fistula in 13/40 (32.5%). The perioperative mortality was 2/40 (5%). Duodenal adenocarcinoma (65%) was the most common postoperative histological diagnosis. The mean tumour size was 36 mm (range 5-103 mm) and a median of 13 nodes were harvested. The median length of stay was 15 days (range 7-66 days). Overall, 12/40 patients (30%) had a preoperative diagnosis of high-grade dysplasia. The postoperative specimen in this subgroup of patients was reviewed carefully and only 3/12 (25%) patients had high-grade dysplasia in the resection specimen. In the remaining patients, 3/12 (25%) had adenocarcinoma in the resection specimen and 6/12 patients (50%) had low-grade dysplasia. CONCLUSION: PD carries a high mortality and morbidity, especially for duodenal lesions. We recommend a careful endoscopic review after the index case with a high-definition optical evaluation of duodenal lesions. This, in addition to an experienced histological assessment of the index biopsy material, forms an essential prerequisite in aiding the multidisciplinary team in the decision-making process with respect to triage of these lesions to conservative management, surveillance, endoscopic resection or finally surgical resection.