Search

Background and Aim: During COVID‐19, restrictions to elective endoscopy were introduced worldwide. A reduction in procedures may impact trainees' endoscopy learning. This study aims to assess Australian advanced gastroenterology and general surgery trainees' self‐perceived efficacy and knowledge in endoscopy during the pandemic. Methods: All Australian gastroenterology and general surgery trainees in their last 2 years of accredited training were invited to participate through email (2020–2021 and 2021–2022 training cycles). The primary outcome was to assess trainees' self‐efficacy and knowledge regarding gastrointestinal endoscopy. Secondary outcomes included subgroup analysis between gastroenterology and general surgery trainees. Self‐perceived efficacy was assessed with Likert‐scale questions on 20 endoscopy procedures and knowledge was assessed through 21 endoscopy‐related multiple choice questions. Results: Eighty‐one trainees responded to a self‐efficacy questionnaire and 77 responded to the knowledge questionnaire. Over 90% of the trainees were confident or extremely confident in diagnostic endoscopy, but only half demonstrated similar efficacy for therapeutic endoscopy. The efficacy for basic endoscopy procedures was higher for gastroenterology trainees (64.0% vs 51.1%, P < 0.001). Last‐year trainee achievement of conjoint committee requirements for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was achieved in 95.8% of gastroenterology trainees versus 22.2% of surgical trainees (P < 0.001). The median score on the knowledge questionnaire was also higher for the gastroenterology subset (90.5% vs 71.4%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: During COVID‐19, endoscopy trainees' self‐efficacy in endoscopic diagnostic procedures was achieved for most trainees. The differences in self‐perceived efficacy and knowledge between gastroenterology and surgical trainees may be reflective of the different opportunities for learning between the two groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography are the gold standard for managing acute cholecystitis and malignant biliary obstruction, respectively. Recent advances in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have provided alternatives for managing patients in whom these approaches fail, namely, EUS‐guided gallbladder drainage (EUS‐GB) and EUS‐guided bile duct drainage (EUS‐BD). We aimed to assess the technical and clinical success of these techniques in the largest multicenter cohort published to date. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter, observational study involving 17 centers across Australia and New Zealand was conducted. All patients who had EUS‐GB or EUS‐BD performed in a participating center using a lumen apposing metal stent between 2016 and 2020 were included. Primary outcome was technical success, defined as intra‐procedural successful drainage. Secondary outcomes included clinical success and 30‐day mortality. Results: One hundred and fifteen patients underwent EUS‐GB (n = 49) or EUS‐BD (n = 66). EUS‐GB was technically successful in 47 (95.9%) while EUS‐BD was successful in 60 (90.9%). All failed cases were due to maldeployment of the distal flange outside of the targeted lumen. Clinical success of EUS‐GB was achieved in 39 (79.6%). No patients required subsequent cholecystectomy. Clinical success of EUS‐BD was achieved in 52 (78.8 %). Thirty‐day mortality was 14.3% for EUS‐GB and 12.1% for EUS‐BD. Conclusions: EUS‐guided gallbladder drainage and EUS‐BD are promising alternatives for managing nonsurgical candidates with cholecystitis and malignant biliary obstruction following failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Both techniques delivered high technical success with acceptable clinical success. Further research is needed to investigate the gap between technical and clinical success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality metric in colonoscopy. However, there is conflicting evidence around factors that influence ADR. This study aims to investigate the effect of time of day and endoscopist background on ADR and sessile serrated adenoma/polyp detection rate (SSA/P‐DR) for screening colonoscopies. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy in 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Primary outcome was the effect of time of day and endoscopist specialty on screening ADR. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of the same factors on SSA/P‐DR and other metrics and collinearity of ADR and SSA/P‐DR. Linear regression models were used for association between ADR, time of day, and endoscopist background. Bowel preparation, endoscopist, session, patient age, and gender were adjusted for. Linear regression model was also used for comparing ADR and SSA/P‐DR. Chi‐square was used for difference of proportions. Results: Two thousand six hundred fifty‐seven colonoscopies, of which 558 were screening colonoscopies, were performed. The adjusted mean ADR (screening) was 36.8% in the morning compared with 30.5% in the afternoon (P < 0.0001) and was 36.8% for gastroenterologists compared with 30.4% for surgeons (P < 0.0001). For every 1‐h delay in commencing the procedure, there was a reduction in mean ADR by 3.4%. Using a linear regression model, a statistically significant positive association was found between ADR and SSA/P‐DR (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Morning and afternoon sessions and gastroenterologists and surgeons achieved the minimum standards recommended for ADR. Afternoon lists and surgeons were associated with a lower ADR compared with morning and gastroenterologists, respectively. Additionally, SSA/P‐DR showed collinearity with ADR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: During COVID-19 outbreak, restrictions to in-person consultations were introduced with a rise in telehealth. An indirect benefit of telehealth could be better attendance. This study aimed to assess "failure-to-attend" (FTA) rate and satisfaction for two endoscopy-related compulsory telehealth clinics during the COVID-19 outbreak., Methods: Consecutive patients booked for endoscopy-related telehealth clinics at a tertiary hospital were prospectively assessed. In-person clinic control data were assessed retrospectively. Sample size was calculated to detect an anticipated increase in attendance of 8%. Secondary outcomes included FTA differences between clinics and evaluation of patients and doctors satisfaction. Satisfaction was assessed based on six Likert scale questions used in previous telehealth research and asked to both patients and doctors (6Q&#95;score). This study was exempt from IRB review after institutional IRB review., Results: There were 691 patients booked for appointments in our endoscopy clinics during the study periods (373 in 2020). FTA rates were lowered by half during the compulsory telehealth clinics (12.6% to 6.4%, P < 0.01). The patient 6Q&#95;score was higher for the advanced endoscopy clinic (84.6% vs 73.8%, P < 0.01), while the doctor 6Q&#95;score was similar between both advanced clinics and post endoscopy clinics (91.1% vs 92.5% respectively, P = 0.80). An in-person follow-up consultation was suggested for 3.5% of the appointments, while the necessity of physical examination was flagged in 5.1%., Conclusions: The use of phone consultations in endoscopy-related clinics during the COVID-19 outbreak has improved FTA rates while demonstrating high satisfaction rates. The need for in-person follow-up consultations and physical examination were low., (© 2020 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background and Aims: Endoscopy guidelines recommend adhering to policies such as resect and discard only if the optical biopsy is accurate. However, accuracy in predicting histology can vary greatly. Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for characterization of colorectal lesions may help with this issue. In this study, CAD software developed at the University of Adelaide (Australia) that includes serrated polyp differentiation was validated with Japanese images on narrow-band imaging (NBI) and blue-laser imaging (BLI)., Methods: CAD software developed using machine learning and densely connected convolutional neural networks was modeled with NBI colorectal lesion images (Olympus 190 series - Australia) and validated for NBI (Olympus 290 series) and BLI (Fujifilm 700 series) with Japanese datasets. All images were correlated with histology according to the modified Sano classification. The CAD software was trained with Australian NBI images and tested with separate sets of images from Australia (NBI) and Japan (NBI and BLI)., Results: An Australian dataset of 1235 polyp images was used as training, testing, and internal validation sets. A Japanese dataset of 20 polyp images on NBI and 49 polyp images on BLI was used as external validation sets. The CAD software had a mean area under the curve (AUC) of 94.3% for the internal set and 84.5% and 90.3% for the external sets (NBI and BLI, respectively)., Conclusions: The CAD achieved AUCs comparable with experts and similar results with NBI and BLI. Accurate CAD prediction was achievable, even when the predicted endoscopy imaging technology was not part of the training set., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Current data shows there are differences in factors associated with colorectal neoplasia based on geographical location and cultural settings. There are no studies focusing on the association between environmental factors and colorectal polyps in Australia. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the association of various factors with different colorectal neoplasia histology. We utilized a simplified one-page questionnaire for patients undergoing colonoscopy for information on age; gender; comorbidities; family history of colorectal cancer; physical activity; smoking; diet; alcohol intake; and body mass index. Factors were then evaluated for association with the presence of: (1) neoplastic lesions; (2) conventional adenomas; (3) neoplastic serrated polyps; (4) any lesions (past and present); and (5) hyperplastic polyps. 291 procedures and 260 patients were included. Factors with a p-value < 0.2 in a univariate regression were included in an initial multivariable regression model. Backwards elimination was then performed, removing one predictor at a time until only significant predictors remained. In the final multivariable model, age≥65, male gender, type-2 diabetes mellitus, active smoking and family history of colorectal cancer were found to be statistically significant predictors for the presence of colorectal neoplasia. However, the significant predictors found for conventional adenomas (older age, male gender and smoking) were different from the significant predictors for neoplastic serrated polyps (type-2 diabetes mellitus and family history of colorectal cancer). Older age, male gender, type-2 diabetes mellitus, and smoking were significantly associated with the presence of colorectal neoplasia. The factors associated with conventional adenomas differed from those associated with neoplastic serrated polyps., Competing Interests: All authors declare no conflicts of interest for this paper.

Background and Aim: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality metric in colonoscopy. However, there is conflicting evidence around factors that influence ADR. This study aims to investigate the effect of time of day and endoscopist background on ADR and sessile serrated adenoma/polyp detection rate (SSA/P-DR) for screening colonoscopies., Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy in 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Primary outcome was the effect of time of day and endoscopist specialty on screening ADR. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of the same factors on SSA/P-DR and other metrics and collinearity of ADR and SSA/P-DR. Linear regression models were used for association between ADR, time of day, and endoscopist background. Bowel preparation, endoscopist, session, patient age, and gender were adjusted for. Linear regression model was also used for comparing ADR and SSA/P-DR. Chi-square was used for difference of proportions., Results: Two thousand six hundred fifty-seven colonoscopies, of which 558 were screening colonoscopies, were performed. The adjusted mean ADR (screening) was 36.8% in the morning compared with 30.5% in the afternoon (P < 0.0001) and was 36.8% for gastroenterologists compared with 30.4% for surgeons (P < 0.0001). For every 1-h delay in commencing the procedure, there was a reduction in mean ADR by 3.4%. Using a linear regression model, a statistically significant positive association was found between ADR and SSA/P-DR (P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Morning and afternoon sessions and gastroenterologists and surgeons achieved the minimum standards recommended for ADR. Afternoon lists and surgeons were associated with a lower ADR compared with morning and gastroenterologists, respectively. Additionally, SSA/P-DR showed collinearity with ADR., (© 2018 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)