Cargando…

Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Correct optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps is crucial to implement a resect and discard strategy. Training methods have been proposed to reach recommended optical diagnosis thresholds. The aim of our study was to present a systematic review and meta-analysis on optical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smith, Samuel C.L., Siau, Keith, Cannatelli, Rosanna, Antonelli, Giulio, Shivaji, Uday N., Ghosh, Subrata, Saltzman, John R., Hassan, Cesare, Iacucci, Marietta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8062231/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33937513
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1381-7181
_version_ 1783681727559892992
author Smith, Samuel C.L.
Siau, Keith
Cannatelli, Rosanna
Antonelli, Giulio
Shivaji, Uday N.
Ghosh, Subrata
Saltzman, John R.
Hassan, Cesare
Iacucci, Marietta
author_facet Smith, Samuel C.L.
Siau, Keith
Cannatelli, Rosanna
Antonelli, Giulio
Shivaji, Uday N.
Ghosh, Subrata
Saltzman, John R.
Hassan, Cesare
Iacucci, Marietta
author_sort Smith, Samuel C.L.
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims  Correct optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps is crucial to implement a resect and discard strategy. Training methods have been proposed to reach recommended optical diagnosis thresholds. The aim of our study was to present a systematic review and meta-analysis on optical diagnosis training. Methods  PubMed/Medline and Cochrane databases were searched between 1980 and October 2019 for studies reporting outcomes on optical diagnosis training of colorectal polyps. The primary outcome was optical diagnosis accuracy compared to histological analysis pre-training and post-training intervention. Subgroup analyses of experienced/trainee endoscopists, training methods, and small/diminutive polyps were included. Results  Overall, 16 studies met inclusion criteria, analyzing the impact of training on 179 endoscopists. Pre-training accuracy was 70.3 % (6416/9131 correct diagnoses) whereas post-training accuracy was 81.6 % (7416/9213 correct diagnoses) (risk ratio [RR] 1.17; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.09–1.24, P  < 0.001). In experienced endoscopists, accuracy improved from 69.8 % (3771/5403 correct diagnoses) to 82.4 % (4521/5485 correct diagnoses) (RR 1.20; 95 % CI: 1.11–1.29, P  < 0.001). Among trainees, accuracy improved from 69.6 % (2645/3803 correct diagnoses) to 78.8 % (2995/3803 correct diagnoses) (RR 1.14; 95 % CI 1.06–1.24, P  < 0.001). In the small/diminutive polyp subgroup, accuracy improved from 68.1 % (3549/5214 correct diagnoses) to 77.1 % (4022/5214 correct diagnoses) in (RR 1.16 95 % CI 1.08–1.24 P  < 0.001). On meta-regression analysis, the improvement in accuracy did not differ between computerized vs. didactic training approaches for experienced ( P  = 0.792) and trainee endoscopists ( P  = 0.312). Conclusions  Optical diagnosis training is effective in improving accuracy of histology prediction in colorectal polyps. Didactic and computer-based training show comparable effectiveness in improving diagnostic accuracy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8062231
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80622312021-05-01 Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis Smith, Samuel C.L. Siau, Keith Cannatelli, Rosanna Antonelli, Giulio Shivaji, Uday N. Ghosh, Subrata Saltzman, John R. Hassan, Cesare Iacucci, Marietta Endosc Int Open Background and study aims  Correct optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps is crucial to implement a resect and discard strategy. Training methods have been proposed to reach recommended optical diagnosis thresholds. The aim of our study was to present a systematic review and meta-analysis on optical diagnosis training. Methods  PubMed/Medline and Cochrane databases were searched between 1980 and October 2019 for studies reporting outcomes on optical diagnosis training of colorectal polyps. The primary outcome was optical diagnosis accuracy compared to histological analysis pre-training and post-training intervention. Subgroup analyses of experienced/trainee endoscopists, training methods, and small/diminutive polyps were included. Results  Overall, 16 studies met inclusion criteria, analyzing the impact of training on 179 endoscopists. Pre-training accuracy was 70.3 % (6416/9131 correct diagnoses) whereas post-training accuracy was 81.6 % (7416/9213 correct diagnoses) (risk ratio [RR] 1.17; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.09–1.24, P  < 0.001). In experienced endoscopists, accuracy improved from 69.8 % (3771/5403 correct diagnoses) to 82.4 % (4521/5485 correct diagnoses) (RR 1.20; 95 % CI: 1.11–1.29, P  < 0.001). Among trainees, accuracy improved from 69.6 % (2645/3803 correct diagnoses) to 78.8 % (2995/3803 correct diagnoses) (RR 1.14; 95 % CI 1.06–1.24, P  < 0.001). In the small/diminutive polyp subgroup, accuracy improved from 68.1 % (3549/5214 correct diagnoses) to 77.1 % (4022/5214 correct diagnoses) in (RR 1.16 95 % CI 1.08–1.24 P  < 0.001). On meta-regression analysis, the improvement in accuracy did not differ between computerized vs. didactic training approaches for experienced ( P  = 0.792) and trainee endoscopists ( P  = 0.312). Conclusions  Optical diagnosis training is effective in improving accuracy of histology prediction in colorectal polyps. Didactic and computer-based training show comparable effectiveness in improving diagnostic accuracy. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2021-05 2021-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8062231/ /pubmed/33937513 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1381-7181 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Smith, Samuel C.L.
Siau, Keith
Cannatelli, Rosanna
Antonelli, Giulio
Shivaji, Uday N.
Ghosh, Subrata
Saltzman, John R.
Hassan, Cesare
Iacucci, Marietta
Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort training methods in optical diagnosis and characterization of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8062231/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33937513
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1381-7181
work_keys_str_mv AT smithsamuelcl trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT siaukeith trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT cannatellirosanna trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT antonelligiulio trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shivajiudayn trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ghoshsubrata trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT saltzmanjohnr trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hassancesare trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT iacuccimarietta trainingmethodsinopticaldiagnosisandcharacterizationofcolorectalpolypsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis