scholarly journals Self-study of the non-extension sign in an e-learning program improves diagnostic accuracy of invasion depth of early gastric cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 07 (07) ◽  
pp. E871-E882
Author(s):  
Minoru Kato ◽  
Noriya Uedo ◽  
Takashi Nagahama ◽  
Kenshi Yao ◽  
Hisashi Doyama ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and study aims We developed an e-learning program for endoscopic diagnosis of invasion depth of early gastric cancer (EGC) using a simple diagnostic criterion called non-extension sign, and the contribution of self-study quizzes to improvement of diagnostic accuracy was evaluated. Methods We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study that recruited endoscopists throughout Japan. After completing a pretest, the participants watched video lectures and undertook post-test 1. The participants were then randomly allocated to either the self-study or non-self-study group, and participants in the first group completed the self-study program that comprised 100-case quizzes. Finally, participants in both groups undertook post-test 2. The primary endpoint was the difference in post-test 2 scores between the groups. The perfect score for the tests was set as 100 points. Results A total of 423 endoscopists completed the pretest and were enrolled. Post-test 1 was completed by 415 endoscopists and 208 were allocated to the self-study group and 207 to the non-self-study group. Two hundred and four in the self-study group and 205 in the non-self-study group were included in the analysis. Video lectures improved the mean score of post-test 1 from 72 to 77 points. Participants who completed the self-study quizzes showed significantly better post-test 2 scores compared with the non-self-study group (80 vs. 76 points, respectively, P < 0.0001). Conclusions Our e-learning program showed that self-study quizzes consolidated knowledge of the non-extension sign and improved diagnostic ability of endoscopists for invasion depth of EGC.

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Ding Shi ◽  
Xiao-xia Xi

Background. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the first imaging modality for investigating the depth of invasion in early gastric cancer (EGC). However, there is presently no consensus on the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing the invasion depth of EGC. Aim. This study is aimed at systematically evaluating the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing the invasion depth of EGC and its affecting factors. Methods. The literatures were identified by searching PubMed, SpringerLink, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Nature, and Karger knowledge databases. Two researchers extracted the data from the literature and reconstructed these in 2×2 tables. The Meta-DiSc software was used to evaluate the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic advantage ratio, and 95% confidence interval (CI). The SROC was drawn, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the diagnostic value. Results. A total of 17 articles were selected, which included 4525 cases of lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic dominance ratio, and 95% CI of EUS for diagnosing EGC was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.86-0.88), 0.67 (95% CI: 0.65-0.70), 2.90 (95% CI: 2.25-3.75), 0.17 (95% CI: 0.13-0.23), and 18.25 (95% CI: 12.61-26.39), respectively. The overall overstaging rate of mucosa/submucosa 1 (M/SM1) and SM by EUS was 13.31% and 32.8%, respectively, while the overall understaging rate of SM was 29.7%. The total misdiagnosis rates for EUS were as follows: 30.4% for lesions≥2 cm and 20.9% for lesions<2 cm, 27.7% for ulcerative lesions and 21.4% for nonulcerative lesions, and 22% for differentiated lesions and 26.9% for undifferentiated lesions. Conclusion. EUS has a moderate diagnostic value for the depth of invasion of EGC. The shape, size, and differentiation of lesions might be the main factors that affect the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing EGC.


2018 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. AB176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Jin Yoon ◽  
Seunghyup Kim ◽  
Jie-Hyun Kim ◽  
Ji-Soo Keum ◽  
Junik Jo ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. AB295-AB296
Author(s):  
Jun Chul Park ◽  
Soo In Choi ◽  
Eun Hye Kim ◽  
Sung Kwan Shin ◽  
Sang Kil Lee ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 917-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeongmin Choi ◽  
Sang Gyun Kim ◽  
Jong Pil Im ◽  
Joo Sung Kim ◽  
Hyun Chae Jung ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document