Browsing by Author "Gordon, Stuart"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Learning Curves and Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Among Advanced Endoscopy Trainees: The Rapid Assessment of Trainee Endoscopy Skills (RATES) Study
    (Elsevier, 2017) Wani, Sachin; Keswani, Rajesh; Hall, Matt; Han, Samuel; Ali, Meer Akbar; Brauer, Brian; Carlin, Linda; Chak, Amitabh; Collins, Dan; Cote, Gregory A.; Diehl, David L.; DiMaio, Christopher J.; Dries, Andrew; El-Hajj, Ihab; Ellert, Swan; Fairley, Kimberley; Faulx, Ashley; Fujii-Lau, Larissa; Gaddam, Srinivas; Gan, Seng-Ian; Gaspar, Jonathan P.; Gautamy, Chitiki; Gordon, Stuart; Harris, Cynthia; Hyder, Sarah; Jones, Ross; Kim, Stephen; Komanduri, Srinadh; Law, Ryan; Lee, Linda; Mounzer, Rawad; Mullady, Daniel; Muthusamy, V. Raman; Olyaee, Mojtaba; Pfau, Patrick; Saligram, Shreyas; Piraka, Cyrus; Rastogi, Amit; Rosenkranz, Laura; Rzouq, Fadi; Saxena, Aditi; Shah, Raj J.; Simon, Violette C.; Small, Aaron; Sreenarasimhaiah, Jayaprakash; Walker, Andrew; Wang, Andrew Y.; Watson, Rabindra R.; Wilson, Robert H.; Yachimski, Patrick; Yang, Dennis; Edmundowicz, Steven; Early, Dayna S.; Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine
    Background and aims Based on the Next Accreditation System, trainee assessment should occur on a continuous basis with individualized feedback. We aimed to validate endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) learning curves among advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs) using a large national sample of training programs and to develop a centralized database that allows assessment of performance in relation to peers. Methods ASGE recognized training programs were invited to participate and AETs were graded on ERCP and EUS exams using a validated competency assessment tool that assesses technical and cognitive competence in a continuous fashion. Grading for each skill was done using a 4-point scoring system and a comprehensive data collection and reporting system was built to create learning curves using cumulative sum analysis. Individual results and benchmarking to peers were shared with AETs and trainers quarterly. Results Of the 62 programs invited, 20 programs and 22 AETs participated in this study. At the end of training, median number of EUS and ERCP performed/AET was 300 (range 155-650) and 350 (125-500). Overall, 3786 exams were graded (EUS:1137; ERCP–biliary 2280, pancreatic 369). Learning curves for individual endpoints, and overall technical/cognitive aspects in EUS and ERCP demonstrated substantial variability and were successfully shared with all programs. The majority of trainees achieved overall technical (EUS: 82%; ERCP: 60%) and cognitive (EUS: 76%; ERCP: 100%) competence at conclusion of training. Conclusions These results demonstrate the feasibility of establishing a centralized database to report individualized learning curves and confirm the substantial variability in time to achieve competence among AETs in EUS and ERCP.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Snare Tip Soft Coagulation vs Argon Plasma Coagulation vs No Margin Treatment After Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyp Resection: a Randomized Trial
    (Elsevier, 2023) Rex, Douglas K.; Haber, Gregory B.; Khashab, Mouen; Rastogi, Amit; Hasan, Muhammad K.; DiMaio, Christopher J.; Kumta, Nikhil A.; Nagula, Satish; Gordon, Stuart; Al-Kawas, Firas; Waye, Jerome D.; Razjouyan, Hadie; Dye, Charles E.; Moyer, Matthew T.; Shultz, Jeremiah; Lahr, Rachel E.; Yuen, Poi Yu Sofia; Dixon, Rebekah; Boyd, LaKeisha; Pohl, Heiko; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background & Aims Thermal treatment of the defect margin after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions reduces the recurrence rate. Both snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) and argon plasma coagulation (APC) have been used for thermal margin treatment, but there are few data directly comparing STSC with APC for this indication. Methods We performed a randomized 3-arm trial in 9 US centers comparing STSC with APC with no margin treatment (control) of defects after EMR of colorectal nonpedunculated lesions ≥15 mm. The primary end point was the presence of residual lesion at first follow-up. Results There were 384 patients and 414 lesions randomized, and 308 patients (80.2%) with 328 lesions completed ≥1 follow-up. The proportion of lesions with residual polyp at first follow-up was 4.6% with STSC, 9.3% with APC, and 21.4% with control subjects (no margin treatment). The odds of residual polyp at first follow-up were lower for STSC and APC when compared with control subjects (P = .001 and P = .01, respectively). The difference in odds was not significant between STSC and APC. STSC took less time to apply than APC (median, 3.35 vs 4.08 minutes; P = .019). Adverse event rates were low, with no difference between arms. Conclusions In a randomized trial STSC and APC were each superior to no thermal margin treatment after EMR. STSC was faster to apply than APC. Because STSC also results in lower cost and plastic waste than APC (APC requires an additional device), our study supports STSC as the preferred thermal margin treatment after colorectal EMR.