Su1744 DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY AND LEARNING CURVE IN THE CHARACTERIZATION OF COLORECTAL POLYPS FOR FIRST YEAR GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY TRAINEES

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. AB404
Author(s):  
César Tróchez Mejía ◽  
Martha C. Galindo Orozco ◽  
Katia Picazo Ferrera ◽  
Cesar Jaurrieta Rico ◽  
Miguel Ángel Herrera ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. S43
Author(s):  
A. Maimone ◽  
G. Bersani ◽  
A. Guida ◽  
C. Amella ◽  
R. Arena ◽  
...  

Endoscopy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Britt B. S. L. Houwen ◽  
Cesare Hassan ◽  
Veerle M. H. Coupé ◽  
Marjolein J. E. Greuter ◽  
Yark Hazewinkel ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has developed a core curriculum for high quality optical diagnosis training for practice across Europe. The development of easy-to-measure competence standards for optical diagnosis can optimize clinical decision-making in endoscopy. This manuscript represents an official Position Statement of the ESGE aiming to define simple, safe, and easy-to-measure competence standards for endoscopists and artificial intelligence systems performing optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps (1 – 5 mm). Methods A panel of European experts in optical diagnosis participated in a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on Simple Optical Diagnosis Accuracy (SODA) competence standards for implementation of the optical diagnosis strategy for diminutive colorectal polyps. In order to assess the clinical benefits and harms of implementing optical diagnosis with different competence standards, a systematic literature search was performed. This was complemented with the results from a recently performed simulation study that provides guidance for setting alternative competence standards for optical diagnosis. Proposed competence standards were based on literature search and simulation study results. Competence standards were accepted if at least 80 % agreement was reached after a maximum of three voting rounds. Recommendation 1 In order to implement the leave-in-situ strategy for diminutive colorectal lesions (1–5 mm), it is clinically acceptable if, during real-time colonoscopy, at least 90 % sensitivity and 80 % specificity is achieved for high confidence endoscopic characterization of colorectal neoplasia of 1–5 mm in the rectosigmoid. Histopathology is used as the gold standard.Level of agreement 95 %. Recommendation 2 In order to implement the resect-and-discard strategy for diminutive colorectal lesions (1–5 mm), it is clinically acceptable if, during real-time colonoscopy, at least 80 % sensitivity and 80 % specificity is achieved for high confidence endoscopic characterization of colorectal neoplasia of 1–5 mm. Histopathology is used as the gold standard.Level of agreement 100 %. Conclusion The developed SODA competence standards define diagnostic performance thresholds in relation to clinical consequences, for training and for use when auditing the optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps.


2019 ◽  
Vol 07 (12) ◽  
pp. E1616-E1623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alanna Ebigbo ◽  
Christoph Palm ◽  
Andreas Probst ◽  
Robert Mendel ◽  
Johannes Manzeneder ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and aim The growing number of publications on the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine underlines the enormous importance and potential of this emerging field of research. In gastrointestinal endoscopy, AI has been applied to all segments of the gastrointestinal tract most importantly in the detection and characterization of colorectal polyps. However, AI research has been published also in the stomach and esophagus for both neoplastic and non-neoplastic disorders. The various technical as well as medical aspects of AI, however, remain confusing especially for non-expert physicians. This physician-engineer co-authored review explains the basic technical aspects of AI and provides a comprehensive overview of recent publications on AI in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Finally, a basic insight is offered into understanding publications on AI in gastrointestinal endoscopy.


Author(s):  
David Roy Anderson ◽  
Sarah Blissett ◽  
Patricia O’Sullivan ◽  
Atif Qasim

Abstract Background Trainees learn transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) interpretation through independently completing and reviewing selected portions of the study with experts. The diagnostic accuracy of novice TTE interpretation is known to be low and schema for reading TTEs systematically are lacking. The purpose of our study is to identify techniques experts use while reading TTEs which could be used to more effectively teach novice readers. Methods We performed a prospective qualitative case study to observe how experts and trainees interpret TTEs in an academic institution using a concurrent think aloud (CTA) method. Three TTEs of intermediate complexity were given to 3 advanced imaging fellows, 3 first year fellows and 3 expert TTE readers Participants filled out a report while reading and described aloud their thought processes. Sessions were video and audiotaped for analysis. Results Experts and advanced fellows used specific techniques that novices did not including: previewing studies, reviewing multiple images simultaneously, having flexibility in image review order and disease coding, and saving hardest elements to code for the end. Direct observation of TTE reading informed trainee inefficiencies and was a well-received educational tool. Conclusions In this single centered study we identified several unique approaches experts use to interpret TTEs which may be teachable to novices. Although limited in generalizability the findings of this study suggests that a more systematic approach to TTE interpretation, using techniques found in experts, might be of significant value for trainees. Further study is needed to evaluate teaching practices at other institutions and to assess whether implementation of these techniques by novices improves can improve their diagnostic accuracy and efficiency of reading at an earlier stage in their training.


JAMA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 320 (16) ◽  
pp. 1706
Author(s):  
Grant S. Hoekzema ◽  
James J. Stevermer

1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piet Union ◽  
Peter F. Muys ◽  
Dirk Vyncke ◽  
Ben Depuydt ◽  
Pierre M. Boone

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document