Quality indicators for EGD

Optimal number of images and 2-year interval affect cancer detection in screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy: An observational study

We aimed to identify quality indicator for esophagogastroduodenoscopy for detecting upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. Data from 43,526 consecutive health checkups from August 2012 to January 2022 were retrospectively collected. The study ultimately analyzed 42,387 examinations by 12 endoscopists who performed more than 1000 examinations, including all cancers detected. These endoscopists were classified either into fast/slow group based on their mean examination time for a normal finding of esophagogastroduodenoscopy during their first year of the examination, or small/large group based on number of endoscopic images, respectively. The association between UGI cancer detection rate and examination time or the number of images was analyzed, using 5 minutes or 50 images as cutoff values. The detection rate of overall (8 pharyngeal, 39 esophageal, 69 gastric) cancers in the fast, slow, small, and large groups were 0.17%, 0.32%, 0.21%, and 0.31%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, endoscopists in the fast group or the small group were less likely to detect overall UGI cancer (OR: 0.596, 95% CI: 0.373-0.952, P = .030; OR: 0.652, 95% CI: 0.434-0.979, P = .039). Additionally, repeated endoscopy within 2 years had a higher overall cancer detection rate, compared with repeated screening after 2 years. In a sub-analysis, a significant negative relationship was found between the detection rate of gastric cancer and the number of gastric images < 35 (OR: 0.305, 95% CI: 0.189-0.492, P = .000). There was also a negative correlation trend between the detection rate of pharyngeal and esophageal cancers and the number of esophageal images < 11 (OR: 0.395, 95% CI: 0.156-1.001, P = .050). The optimal number of images and screening 2-year interval are considered useful quality indicators for detecting UGI cancer. This study also suggests that a total of 50 images, or 35 images of the stomach are suitable for detecting UGI cancer, or gastric cancer, during screening endoscopy.

TEMPORARY REMOVAL: Quality indicators common to all GI endoscopic procedures

The publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

Clinical value of random esophageal biopsies in patients with dysphagia and normal endoscopy who are treated with a proton pump inhibitor

Rome IV recommended esophageal biopsies in patients with dysphagia and normal endoscopy to exclude mucosal disease. Thus far, studies evaluating the utility of this recommendation remain scarce. The aims of this study were to determine the value of random esophageal biopsies in heartburn patients with dysphagia and normal endoscopy and compare the yield of random esophageal biopsies between younger versus older patients. Data were collected from consecutive patients presenting with dysphagia, 18 years and older, who were on proton pump inhibitors and had normal upper endoscopy. Biopsy results of patients with and without heartburn were recorded. Logistic regression analysis was used to compare normal versus abnormal biopsy results in younger and older patients accounting for confounding variables. The number of abnormal biopsies was significantly higher than normal biopsies (68% and 32%, respectively, P = 0.0001). Among abnormal biopsy results, microscopic gastroesophageal reflux disease was significantly more common than all other findings (39%, P = 0.0495). There was no significant difference in biopsy results in patients with and without heartburn as well as younger versus older patients (P = 0.3384, P = 0.1010, and P = 0.8468, respectively). Our study demonstrated that most patients with dysphagia and normal upper endoscopy who are on proton pump inhibitor have some type of histologic mucosal abnormality, which can direct future management. Among abnormal biopsies, microscopic reflux was by far the most common finding in patients with or without a history of heartburn. While this supports the management strategy proposed by Rome IV, age did not drive esophageal biopsy results.

Utilization and quality assessment of digestive endoscopy in China: results from 5-year consecutive nationwide surveys

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, the volume and availability of digestive endoscopy have undergone dramatic development in recent years, with increasing attention on quality assurance. We investigated the utilization and quality of digestive endoscopy in China from 2015 to 2019 and developed a quantitative quality evaluation tool for medical institutions.

METHODS

We invited all tertiary/secondary hospitals in Chinese mainland to participate in the survey annually. The questionnaires included the personnel, annual volume, and quality indicators of endoscopy. An endoscopy quality index (EQI) was developed based on recorded quality indicators using principal component analysis to determine the relative weight.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2019, 806, 1412, 2644, 2468, and 2541 hospitals were respectively enrolled in this study. The average annual volume of endoscopy increased from 12,445 to 16,206 (1.30-fold) and from 2938 to 4255 (1.45-fold) in tertiary and secondary hospitals, respectively. The most obvious growth was observed in diagnostic colonoscopy (1.44-fold for all hospitals after standardization). The proportion of early cancer among all esophageal and gastric cancers during diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy increased from 12.3% (55,210/448,861) to 17.7% (85,429/482,647) and from 11.4% (69,411/608,866) to 16.9% (107,192/634,235), respectively. The adenoma detection rate of diagnostic colonoscopy increased from 14.9% (2,118,123/14,215,592) to 19.3% (3,943,203/20,431,104). The EQI model included 12 quality indicators, incorporating 64.9% (7.792/12) of the total variance into one comprehensive index. According to the EQI measurements, the quality of endoscopy was higher in tertiary hospitals and hospitals in developed areas with higher volume or more endoscopists than that in other hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Digestive endoscopy in China has developed considerably in recent years in terms of both volume and quality. The EQI is a promising tool to quantify the quality of endoscopy at different hospitals.

Quality measures in endoscopy: A systematic analysis of the overall scientific level of evidence and conflicts of interest

Background and study aims  Quality measures were established to develop standards to help assess quality of care, yet variation in endoscopy exists. We performed a systematic review to assess the overall quality of evidence cited in formulating quality measures in endoscopy. Methods  A systematic search was performed on multiple databases from inception until November 15, 2020, to examine the quality measures proposed by all major societies. Quality measures were assessed for their level of quality evidence and categorized as category A (guideline-based), category B (observational studies) or category C (expert opinion). They were also examined for the type of measure (process, structure, outcome), the quality, measurability, review, existing conflicts of interest (COI), and patient participation of the quality measure. Results  An aggregate total of 214 quality measures from nine societies (15 manuscripts) were included and analyzed. Of quality measures in endoscopy, 71.5 %, 23.8 %, and 4.7 % were based on low, moderate, and high quality of evidence, respectively. The proportion of high-quality evidence across societies was significantly different ( P  = 0.028). Of quality measures, 76 % were quantifiable, 18 % contained patient-centric outcomes, and 7 % reported outcome measures. None of the organizations reported on patient involvement or external review, six disclosed existing COI, and 40 % were published more than 5 years ago. Conclusions  Quality measures are important to standardize clinical practice. Because over 70 % of quality measures in endoscopy are based on low-quality evidence, further studies are needed to improve the overall quality to effectively set a standard, reduce variation, and improve care in endoscopic practice.

Assessment of esophagogastroduodenoscopy skills on simulators before real-life performance

Background and study aims  Operator competency is essential for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) quality, which makes appropriate training with a final test important. The aims of this study were to develop a test for assessing skills in performing EGD, gather validity evidence for the test, and establish a credible pass/fail score. Methods  An expert panel developed a practical test using the Simbionix GI Mentor II simulator (3 D Systems) and an EGD phantom (OGI 4, CLA Medical) with a diagnostic (DP) and a technical skills part (TSP) for a prospective validation study. During the test a supervisor measured: 1) total time; 2) degree of mucosal visualization; and 3) landmarks and pathology identification. The contrasting groups standard setting method was used to establish a pass/fail score. Results  We included 15 novices (N), 10 intermediates (I), and 10 experienced endoscopists (E). The internal structure was high with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.76 for TSP time consumption and 0.74 for the identification of landmarks. Mean total times, in minutes, for the DP were N 15.7, I 11.3, and E 7.0, and for TSP., they were N 7.9, I 8.9, and E 2.9. The total numbers of identified landmarks were N 26, I 41, and E 48. Mean visualization percentages were N 80, I 71, and E 71. A pass/fail standard was established requiring identification of all landmarks and performance of the TSP in < 5 minutes. All experienced endoscopists passed, while none of the endoscopists in the other categories did. Conclusions  We established a test that can distinguish between participants with different competencies. This enables an objective and evidence-based approach to assessment of competencies in EGD.

Lessons learned: Preventable misses and near-misses of endoscopic procedures

Endoscopy is a complex procedure that requires advanced training and a highly skilled practitioner. The advances in the field of endoscopy have made it an invaluable diagnostic tool, but the procedure remains provider dependent. The quality of endoscopy may vary from provider to provider and, as a result, is not perfect. Consequently, 11.3% of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms are missed on the initial upper endoscopy and 2.1%-5.9% of colorectal polyps or cancers are missed on colonoscopy. Pathology is overlooked if endoscopic exam is not done carefully, bypassing proper visualization of the scope’s entry and exit points or, if exam is not taken to completion, not visualizing the most distal bowel segments. We hope to shed light on this issue, establish areas of weakness, and propose possible solutions and preventative measures.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common condition associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. BE is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma, a highly lethal cancer with an increasing incidence over the last 5 decades. These revised guidelines implement Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the definition and diagnosis of BE, screening for BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma, surveillance of patients with known BE, and the medical and endoscopic treatment of BE and its associated early neoplasia. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include a broadening of acceptable screening modalities for BE to include nonendoscopic methods, liberalized intervals for surveillance of short-segment BE, and volume criteria for endoscopic therapy centers for BE. We recommend endoscopic eradication therapy for patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia and those with BE and low-grade dysplasia. We propose structured surveillance intervals for patients with dysplastic BE after successful ablation based on the baseline degree of dysplasia. We could not make recommendations regarding chemoprevention or use of biomarkers in routine practice due to insufficient data.

Important Quality Metrics and Standardization in Endoscopy

Quality metrics and standardization has become critical as the Affordable Care Act mandates that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services change reimbursement from volume to a value-based system. While the most commonly used quality indicators are related to that of colonoscopy, quality metrics for other procedures and endoscopy units have been developed mainly by the American College of Gastroenterology and the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Data to show that these quality metrics, especially in the field of advanced endoscopy as well as in the era of COVID-19 pandemic, can improve patient outcomes, are anticipated.

Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment

INTRODUCTION:

As novel, less invasive (non)endoscopic techniques for detection of Barrett's esophagus (BE) have been developed, there is now renewed interest in screening for BE and related neoplasia. We aimed to determine public preferences for esophageal adenocarcinoma screening to understand the potential of minimally invasive screening modalities.

METHODS:

A discrete choice experiment was conducted in 1,500 individuals, aged 50–75 years, from the general population. Individuals were repeatedly asked to choose between screening scenarios based on conventional upper endoscopy, transnasal endoscopy, nonendoscopic cell collection devices, breath analysis, and a blood test, combined with various levels of test sensitivity and specificity, and no screening. A multinomial logit model was used to estimate individuals' preferences and to calculate expected participation rates.

RESULTS:

In total, 554 respondents (36.9%) completed the survey. The average predicted uptake was 70.5% (95% confidence interval: 69.1%–71.8%). Test sensitivity (47.7%), screening technique (32.6%), and specificity (19.7%) affected screening participation (all P < 0.05). A low test sensitivity had the highest impact on screening participation, resulting in a 25.0% (95% confidence interval: 22.6%–27.7%) decrease. Respondents preferred noninvasive screening tests over endoscopic and capsule-based techniques, but only if sensitivity and specificity were above 80%.

DISCUSSION:

Our study suggests that individuals generally prefer noninvasive BE screening tests. However, these tests would unlikely improve screening uptake when associated with a much lower accuracy for detecting BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma compared with conventional upper endoscopy. Improving accuracy of minimally invasive screening strategies and informing the target population about these accuracies is therefore essential to maximally stimulate screening participation.

Development and validation of a patient-reported scale for tolerability of endoscopic procedures using conscious sedation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) assessing the tolerability of endoscopic procedures are scarce. In this study, we designed and validated a PREM to assess tolerability of endoscopy using conscious sedation.

METHODS

The patient-reported scale for tolerability of endoscopic procedures (PRO-STEP) consists of questions within 2 domains and is administered to outpatients at discharge from the endoscopy unit. Domain 1 (intraprocedural) consists of 2 questions regarding discomfort/pain and awareness, whereas domain 2 (postprocedural) consists of 4 questions on pain, nausea, distention, and either throat or anal pain. All questions are scored on a Likert scale from 0 to 10. Cronbach's alpha was used to measure internal consistency of the questions. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess predictors of higher scores, reported using adjusted odds ratios and confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-five patients (91 colonoscopy, 73 gastroscopy, and 91 ERCP) were included. Colonoscopy was the least tolerable procedure by recall, with mean intraprocedural awareness and discomfort scores of 5.1 ± 3.8, and 2.6 ± 2.7, respectively. Consistency between intraprocedural awareness and discomfort/pain yielded an acceptable Cronbach's alpha of .71 (95% confidence interval, .62-.78). Higher use of midazolam during colonoscopy was inversely associated with an intraprocedural awareness score of 7 or higher (per additional mg: adjusted odds ratio, .23; 95% confidence interval, .09-.54).

CONCLUSIONS

PRO-STEP is a simple PREM that can be administered after multiple endoscopic procedures using conscious sedation. Future work should focus on its performance characteristics in adverse event prediction.

Racial Disparities in Adherence to Quality Indicators in Barrett's Esophagus: An Analysis Using the GIQuIC National Benchmarking Registry

INTRODUCTION

Racial disparities in outcomes in esophageal adenocarcinoma are well established. Using a nationwide registry, we aimed to compare clinical and endoscopic characteristics of blacks and whites with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and adherence to defined quality indicators.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Gastrointestinal Quality Improvement Consortium Registry between January 2012 and December 2019. Patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with an indication of BE screening or surveillance, or an endoscopic finding of BE, were included. Adherence to recommended endoscopic surveillance intervals of 3-5 years for nondysplastic BE and adherence to Seattle biopsy protocol were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess variables associated with adherence.

RESULTS

A total of 100,848 esophagogastroduodenoscopies in 84,789 patients met inclusion criteria (blacks-3,957 and whites-96,891). Blacks were less likely to have histologically confirmed BE (34.3% vs 51.7%, P < 0.01), had shorter BE lengths (1.61 vs 2.35 cm, P < 0.01), and were less likely to have any dysplasia (4.3% vs 7.1%, P < 0.01). Although whites were predominantly male (62.2%), about half of blacks with BE were female (53.0%). Blacks with nondysplastic BE were less likely to be recommended appropriate surveillance intervals (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.68-0.89). Adherence rates to the Seattle protocol were modestly higher among blacks overall (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04-1.20), although significantly lower among blacks with BE segments >6 cm.

DISCUSSION

The use of sex as a risk factor for BE screening may be inappropriate among blacks. Fewer blacks were recommended appropriate surveillance intervals, and blacks with longer segment BE were less likely to undergo Seattle biopsy protocol.

Implementation effect of institutional policy of EGD observation time on neoplasm detection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The observation time in EGD is associated with detection rate of premalignant or neoplastic lesions in the upper GI (UGI) tract. The aim of this study was to evaluate an institutional policy of EGD observation time on the detection rate of UGI neoplasms.

METHODS

From July 2017 to March 2019, all endoscopists were requested to comply with our institutional policy of spending more than 3 minutes of observation time in every screening EGD. Observation time was defined as the time from when the endoscope reached the duodenum to when it was withdrawn. We obtained a neoplasm detection rate (NDR) during this period and compared it with that of a baseline period from 2009 to 2015.

RESULTS

During the study period, 30,506 EGDs were performed. Mean subject age was 49.9 ± 10.5 years, and 56.5% were men. All endoscopists achieved an average EGD observation time of more than 3 minutes during this period. Mean observation time was 3:35 ± 0:50, which was significantly longer than the baseline (2:38 ± 0:21, P < .001). NDR was .33%, which was higher than the baseline (.23%, P < .001). Even after adjusting for subjects' age and gender, smoking history, and endoscopists' biopsy sampling rate, prolonged EGD observation time of more than 3 minutes increased the NDR of UGI neoplasms (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.75).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that implementing a protocol of a prolonged observation time could increase NDR. Observation time should be an important quality indicator of the EGD examination.

Quality in Endoscopy

Quality improvement is a dynamic process that requires continuously monitoring quality indicators and benchmarking these with national and professional standards. Endoscopists have formed societal task forces to propose quality indicators and performance goals. Institutions are now incentivized by payers and value-based reimbursement agreements to have processes in place to measure, report, and act on these quality metrics. Nationwide registries, such as the Gastrointestinal Quality Improvement Consortium, are used to report quality data to these merit-based incentive payment systems. Quality improvement processes such as these are instrumental to improve patient safety, health, and satisfaction while decreasing costs and medical errors.

An Analysis of the GIQuIC Nationwide Quality Registry Reveals Unnecessary Surveillance Endoscopies in Patients With Normal and Irregular Z-Lines

INTRODUCTION

Population-based estimates of adherence to Barrett's esophagus (BE) guidelines are not available. Using a national registry, we assessed surveillance intervals for patients with normal and irregular Z-lines based on the presence or absence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) and among patients with suspected or confirmed BE.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium Registry. Endoscopy data, including procedure indication, demographics, endoscopy and histology findings, and recommendations for further endoscopy, were assessed from January 2013 through December 2019. Patients with an indication of BE screening or surveillance or an endoscopic finding of BE were included. Biopsy and surveillance practices were assessed based on the length of columnar epithelium (0 cm, <1 cm, 1-3 cm, and >3 cm) and diagnosis based on histology findings.

RESULTS

A total of 1,907,801 endoscopies were assessed; 135,704 endoscopies (7.1%) performed in 114,894 patients met the inclusion criteria (men 61.4%, Whites 91%, and mean age of 61.7 years [SD 12.5]). Among patients with normal Z-lines, surveillance endoscopy was recommended for 81% of patients with IM and 20% of individuals without IM. Among patients with irregular Z-lines, surveillance endoscopy was recommended for 81% with IM and 24% without IM. Approximately 30% of patients with confirmed nondysplastic BE (lengths 1-3 and >3 cm) had recommended surveillance intervals of <3 years.

DISCUSSION

An analysis of data from a nationwide quality registry demonstrated that patients without BE are receiving recommendations for surveillance endoscopies and many patients with nondysplastic BE are reexamined too soon.

Frontiers of Robotic Gastroscopy: A Comprehensive Review of Robotic Gastroscopes and Technologies

Simple Summary

With the rapid advancements of medical technologies and patients’ higher expectations for precision diagnostic and surgical outcomes, gastroscopy has been increasingly adopted for the detection and treatment of pathologies in the upper digestive tract. Correspondingly, robotic gastroscopes with advanced functionalities, e.g., disposable, dextrous and not invasive solutions, have been developed in the last years. This article extensively reviews these novel devices and describes their functionalities and performance. In addition, the implementation of artificial intelligence technology into robotic gastroscopes, combined with remote telehealth endoscopy services, are discussed. The aim of this paper is to provide a clear and comprehensive view of contemporary robotic gastroscopes and ancillary technologies to support medical practitioners in their future clinical practice but also to inspire and drive new engineering developments.

Abstract

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract pathology is common worldwide. With recent advancements in robotics, innovative diagnostic and treatment devices have been developed and several translational attempts made. This review paper aims to provide a highly pictorial critical review of robotic gastroscopes, so that clinicians and researchers can obtain a swift and comprehensive overview of key technologies and challenges. Therefore, the paper presents robotic gastroscopes, either commercial or at a progressed technology readiness level. Among them, we show tethered and wireless gastroscopes, as well as devices aimed for UGI surgery. The technological features of these instruments, as well as their clinical adoption and performance, are described and compared. Although the existing endoscopic devices have thus far provided substantial improvements in the effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment, there are certain aspects that represent unwavering predicaments of the current gastroenterology practice. A detailed list includes difficulties and risks, such as transmission of communicable diseases (e.g., COVID-19) due to the doctor–patient proximity, unchanged learning curves, variable detection rates, procedure-related adverse events, endoscopists’ and nurses’ burnouts, limited human and/or material resources, and patients’ preferences to choose non-invasive options that further interfere with the successful implementation and adoption of routine screening. The combination of robotics and artificial intelligence, as well as remote telehealth endoscopy services, are also discussed, as viable solutions to improve existing platforms for diagnosis and treatment are emerging.

Evaluation of long-term adherence to oesophagogastroduodenoscopy quality indicators

INTRODUCTION

In a previous study we demonstrated that a simple training programme improved quality indicators of Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) achieving the recommended benchmarks. However, the long-term effect of this intervention is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of OGDs performed 3 years after of having completed a training programme.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comparative study of 2 cohorts was designed as follows: Group A included OGDs performed in 2016 promptly after a training programme and Group B with OGDs performed from January to March 2019, this group was also divided into 2 subgroups: subgroup B1 of Endoscopists who had participated in the previous training programme and subgroup B2 of Endoscopists who had not. The intra-procedure quality indicators proposed by ASGE-ACG were used.

RESULTS

A total of 1236 OGDs were analysed, 600 from Group A and 636 from Group B (439 subgroup B1 and 197 subgroup B2). The number of complete examinations was lower in Group B (566 [94.3%] vs. 551 [86.6%]; p<0.001). A significant decrease was observed in nearly all quality indicators and they did not reach the recommended benchmarks: retroflexion in the stomach (96% vs. 81%; p<0.001); Seattle biopsy protocol (86% vs. 50%; p=0.03), description of the upper GI bleeding lesion (100% vs. 62%; p<0.01), sufficient intestinal biopsy specimens (at least 4) in suspected coeliac disease (92.5% vs. 18%; p<0.001), photo documentation of the lesion (94% vs. 90%; p<0.05). Regarding the overall assessment of the procedure (including correct performance and adequate photo documentation), a significant decrease was also observed (90.5% vs. 62%; p<0.001). There were no differences between subgroups B1 and B2.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvement observed in 2016 after a training programme did not prevail after 3 years. In order to keep the quality of OGDs above the recommended benchmarks, it is necessary to implement continuous training programmes.

Quality indicators in diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy contributes a major clinical service with consistently growing demand around the world. Its utility corresponds to varying epidemiological issues throughout the globe, with cancer screening and surveillance being of the utmost priority. Despite high accuracy in neoplasia detection, UGI endoscopy remains a highly operator-dependent procedure, characterized by a substantial rate of missed pathology. Despite an overall lack of high-quality performance measures, there is an increased level of awareness about the need for quality control of this procedure, which is reflected in several guidelines and position statements published in recent years. It is widely recognized that quality assessment should go beyond mere technical aspects of the examination, and include both pre- and post-procedural factors. By this means, quality control encompasses the entire patient experience with the health care provider, from appropriate indication and physical assessment, through high-quality endoscopy service, to appropriate follow up and patient satisfaction. This article aims to review the available and emerging quality metrics for UGI endoscopy, taken mostly from Western endoscopy societies, with references to Asian recommendations where appropriate. The paper is limited solely to diagnostic UGI endoscopy and does not include performance measures for therapeutic procedures.

Deep learning-based anatomical site classification for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Purpose

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic image documentation has provided an efficient, low-cost solution to address quality control for endoscopic reporting. The problem is, however, challenging for computer-assisted techniques, because different sites have similar appearances. Additionally, across different patients, site appearance variation may be large and inconsistent. Therefore, according to the British and modified Japanese guidelines, we propose a set of oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) images to be routinely captured and evaluate its efficiency for deep learning-based classification methods.

Methods

A novel EGD image dataset standardising upper GI endoscopy to several steps is established following landmarks proposed in guidelines and annotated by an expert clinician. To demonstrate the discrimination of proposed landmarks that enable the generation of an automated endoscopic report, we train several deep learning-based classification models utilising the well-annotated images.

Results

We report results for a clinical dataset composed of 211 patients (comprising a total of 3704 EGD images) acquired during routine upper GI endoscopic examinations. We find close agreement between predicted labels using our method and the ground truth labelled by human experts. We observe the limitation of current static image classification scheme for EGD image classification.

Conclusion

Our study presents a framework for developing automated EGD reports using deep learning. We demonstrate that our method is feasible to address EGD image classification and can lead towards improved performance and additionally qualitatively demonstrate its performance on our dataset.

Quality Indicators and Outcome Measures of Endoscopy in the National Cancer Screening Program

PURPOSE

Quality indicators of the National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program (NEQIP) and outcome measures of endoscopy in the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) in Korea are not clear. We evaluated the quality indicators of the revised NEQIP and outcome measures of endoscopy at different types of healthcare facilities participating in the NCSP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted between March and August 2018 in primary, secondary, and tertiary healthcare facilities that perform endoscopy as a part of the NCSP. Representative endoscopists completed a questionnaire for quality indicators of the NEQIP and provided data on outcome measures for endoscopy.

RESULTS

Quality indicators of the NEQIP were mostly acceptable. However, the quality indicators for annual volume of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy, training for endoscopy quality improvement by endoscopy nursing staff, colonoscopy reports, documentation of pathologic lesions, quality of endoscopy reprocessing areas, and completion of endoscopy reprocessing education programs were suboptimal. For outcome measures of EGD, the number of photo-documentations and total procedure time were higher at tertiary healthcare facilities than at other facilities (p<0.001 and p=0.023, respectively). For the outcome measures of colonoscopy, colonoscopy completion rate and waiting times for colonoscopy were significantly higher at tertiary healthcare facilities than at other facilities (both p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Outcome measures of endoscopy should be included as quality indicators of NCSP. However, universal outcome measures for all types of healthcare facilities should be established because performance levels of some outcome measures differ among individual healthcare facility types.

Updates on the Facilities, Procedures, and Performance of the Accredited Endoscopy Unit

Endoscopic quality indicators can be classified into three categories, namely facilities and equipment, endoscopic procedures, and outcome measures. In 2019, the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy updated the accreditation of qualified endoscopy unit assessment items for these quality indicators to establish competence and define areas of continuous quality improvement.

Here, we presented the updated program guidelines on the facilities, procedures, and performance of the accredited endoscopy unit. Many of these items have not yet been validated. However, the updated program will help in establishing competence and defining areas of continuous quality improvement in Korean endoscopic practice.

Over-Utilization of Repeat Upper Endoscopy in Patients with Non-dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus: A Quality Registry Study

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines recommend that patients with non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) undergo surveillance endoscopy every 3-5 years. Using a national registry, we assessed compliance to recommended surveillance intervals in patients with NDBE and identified factors associated with compliance.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium registry. Data abstracted include procedure indication, demographics, endoscopy/pathology results, and recommendations for future endoscopy. Patients with an indication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening or surveillance, or an endoscopic finding of BE, with non-dysplastic intestinal metaplasia on pathological examination, were included. Compliance was defined as a recommendation to undergo subsequent endoscopy between 3 and 5 years. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess variables associated with compliance.

RESULTS

Of 786,712 endoscopies assessed, 58,709 (7.5%) endoscopies in 53,541 patients met inclusion criteria (mean age 61.3 years, 60.4% men, 90.2% white, mean BE length was 2.3 cm). Most cases were performed by Gastroenterologists (92.3%) with propofol (78.7%). A total of 29,978 procedures (55.8%) resulted in pathology-confirmed BE. Among procedures with NDBE (n = 25,945), 29.9% were noncompliant with the 3-year threshold; most (26.9%) recommended surveillance at 1- to 2-year intervals. Patient factors such as extremes of age, black race, geographic region, type of sedation, and increasing BE length were associated with noncompliance.

DISCUSSION

Approximately 30% of patients with NDBE are recommended to undergo surveillance endoscopy too soon. Patient factors associated with inappropriate utilization include extremes of age, black race, and increasing BE length. Compliance with appropriate endoscopic follow-up as a quality measure in BE is poor.

Shorter time to achieve endoscopic eradication is not associated with improved long-term outcomes in Barrett's esophagus

Quality indicators have been proposed for endoscopic eradication therapy of Barrett's esophagus (BE). One such measure suggests that complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) should be achieved within 18 months of starting treatment. The aim of this study was to assess whether achievement of CE-IM within 18 months is associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of BE patients who underwent endoscopic eradication. Time to CE-IM was recorded and categorized as ≤ or > 18 months. The main outcome measures were recurrence of IM and of dysplasia after CE-IM, defined as a single endoscopy without endoscopic evidence of BE or histologic evidence of intestinal metaplasia. Recurrence was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. A total of 290 patients were included in the analyses. The baseline histology was high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal carcinoma in 74.2% of patients. CE-IM was achieved in 85.5% of patients, and 54.1% of the cohort achieved CE-IM within 18 months. Achieving CE-IM within 18 months was not associated with reduced risk of recurrence of IM or dysplasia in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. In this cohort, older age and increased BE length were associated with IM recurrence, and increased hiatal hernia size was associated with dysplasia recurrence. Compared to longer times, achieving CE-IM within 18 months was not associated with a reduced risk of recurrence of IM or dysplasia. Alternative evidence-based quality metrics for endoscopic eradication therapy should be identified.

Endoscopist biopsy rate as a quality indicator for outpatient gastroscopy: a multicenter cohort study with validation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The diagnosis of gastric premalignant conditions (GPCs) relies on endoscopy with mucosal sampling. We hypothesized that the endoscopist biopsy rate (EBR) might constitute a quality indicator for EGD, and we have analyzed its association with GPC detection and the rate of missed gastric cancers (GCs).

METHODS

We analyzed EGD databases from 2 high-volume outpatient units. EBR values, defined as the proportion of EGDs with ≥1 biopsy to all examinations were calculated for each endoscopist in Unit A (derivation cohort) and divided by the quartile values into 4 groups. Detection of GPC was calculated for each group and compared using multivariate clustered logistic regression models. Unit B database was used for validation. All patients were followed in the Cancer Registry for missed GCs diagnosed between 1 month and 3 years after EGDs with negative results.

RESULTS

Sixteen endoscopists in Unit A performed 17,490 EGDs of which 15,340 (87.7%) were analyzed. EBR quartile values were 22.4% to 36.7% (low EBR), 36.8% to 43.7% (moderate), 43.8% to 51.6% (high), and 51.7% and 65.8% (very-high); median value 43.8%. The odds ratios for the moderate, high, and very-high EBR groups of detecting GPC were 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.9), 2.0 (95% CI, 1.7-2.4), and 2.5 (95% CI, 2.1-2.9), respectively, compared with the low EBR group (P < .001). This association was confirmed with the same thresholds in the validation cohort. Endoscopists with higher EBR (≥43.8%) had a lower risk of missed cancer compared with those in the lower EBR group (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-1.00; P = .049).

CONCLUSIONS

The EBR parameter is highly variable among endoscopists and is associated with efficacy in GPC detection and the rate of missed GCs.

Revision of Quality Indicators for the Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program of the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea

Gastroscopy and colonoscopy are widely used for the early diagnosis of stomach and colorectal cancer. The present revision integrates recent data regarding previous quality indicators and novel indicators suggested for gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures for the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea. The new indicators, developed by the Quality Improvement Committee of the Korean Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vary in the level of supporting evidence, and most are based solely on expert opinion. Updated indicators validated by clinical research were prioritized, but were chosen by expert consensus when such studies were absent. The resultant quality indicators were graded according to the levels of consensus and recommendations. The updated indicators will provide a relevant guideline for high-quality endoscopy. The future direction of quality indicator development should include relevant outcome measures and an evidence-based approach to support proposed performance targets.

[Revision of Quality Indicators for the Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program of the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea]

Gastroscopy and colonoscopy are widely used for the early diagnosis of stomach and colorectal cancer. The present revision integrates recent data regarding previous quality indicators and novel indicators suggested for gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures for the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea. The new indicators, developed by the Quality Improvement Committee of the Korean Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vary in the level of supporting evidence, and most are based solely on expert opinion. Updated indicators validated by clinical research were prioritized, but were chosen by expert consensus when such studies were absent. The resultant quality indicators were graded according to the levels of consensus and recommendations. The updated indicators will provide a relevant guideline for high-quality endoscopy. The future direction of quality indicator development should include relevant outcome measures and an evidence-based approach to support proposed performance targets.

Quality of Reporting in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Effect of a Simple Audit Intervention

Background and Aim

In contrast to colonoscopy, there are few studies regarding upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy reporting its quality and ways of improving it. Quality audits are recommended, but their influence on the abovementioned quality is not well studied. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of UGI endoscopy reports and assess the effect of a simple audit intervention on UGI endoscopy reporting quality.

Methods

This was a prospective study in a tertiary referral center, including the evaluation of 1,000 consecutive reports of UGI endoscopies before an audit intervention and 250 after. The reports were analyzed according to performance measures defined by three experienced gastroenterologists.

Results

Before the intervention, 51.8% of the incomplete endoscopies did not present any justification for its incompleteness and 88.1% of lesions were correctly described. Overall, 64.1% of the reports were considered as being of high quality. After the audit intervention, follow-up recommendation (53.4 vs. 80.8%, p = 0.001), correct lesion description (88.1 vs. 95.8%, p = 0.001), and correct segment description (92.2 vs. 96.4%, p = 0.020) improved significantly. The rate of unjustified incomplete endoscopies decreased significantly (51.8 vs. 28.9%, p = 0.010). The high-quality endoscopy rate improved 13.9% after the intervention (p < 0.001). Both specialists and residents improved with the audit intervention with a similar percentage of improvement in the high-quality endoscopy rate (13.9 vs. 13.4%).

Conclusions

A simple audit intervention is a good way to improve the quality of reporting of UGI endoscopy, independently of degree and experience. Some of the performance measure accomplishments may depend on the software used by the endoscopy centers and it should be a priority to optimize it.

Assessment of quality indicators among nurse practitioners performing upper endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Limited international data have shown that non-physicians can safely perform upper endoscopy, but no such study has been performed in the United States. Our aim was to assess the quality of outpatient upper endoscopies performed by nurse practitioners (NPs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Retrospective chart review of upper endoscopies performed by 3 NPs between 2010 and 2013 was performed. Comparisons among all NPs performing upper endoscopy and assessment of individual NP performance over time with respect to quality indicators were performed.

RESULTS

Three NPs performed 333 upper endoscopies (distribution of 166, 44, and 123, respectively). Of the cases, 98.2 %s were successfully completed to the second portion of the duodenum. In most cases, photo-documentation of required anatomical landmarks was performed: GE junction (84.2 %), GE junction in retroflexed view (84.2 %), antrum (82.1 %) and duodenum (80.9 %). Photo-documentation improved with increasing experience. NPs appropriately performed biopsies for specific medical conditions: 10/11 (90.9 %) gastric ulcers were biopsied and 63/66 (95.5) of patients with iron deficiency had duodenal biopsies performed for celiac disease. A physician endoscopist was required during the procedure 22.5 % of the time. Important parameters such as documenting informed consent (100 %) and documenting a discharge plan (99.4 %) in the procedure reports were overwhelming present. There was a single adverse event during the study period.

CONCLUSION

 In the first US study of NPs performing upper endoscopy, they were able to perform high-quality and safe upper endoscopies. These findings support incorporation of non-physicians alongside physicians to help meet the growing demand for endoscopic services across the United States.

Regional Variability of Repeat Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Use in the National Veteran Population

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) procedures are performed frequently to evaluate gastrointestinal disease and symptoms.

AIM

To determine regional practice variability of repeat EGDs in a national population.

METHODS

The study sample included US Veterans with an outpatient index EGD from 1/1/2008 to 12/2010. We determined risk of repeat endoscopy from 1/2008 to 10/1/2014. A logistic regression model was used to assess the association between the odds of repeated EGD and patient demographics, ICD diagnostic codes, and geographic region. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to obtain the adjusted odds ratio and predicted probabilities of repeat EGDs by region.

RESULTS

A total of 202,086 patients had an index endoscopy from 1/2008 to 12/2010. Unique patients with an index endoscopy were predominantly male (93.2%), white (72.8%), and on average 61 years. A total of 58,469 patients (28.9%) had one or more repeat EGDs, accounting for 103,253 repeat procedures through 10/2014. ICD-9-CM codes associated with increased risk of repeat procedures were Barrett's esophagus (OR 3.6, 95% CI 3.5-3.7), dysphagia (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.3), ulcer (OR 1.3, 95% CI 2.2-2.4), stricture (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.7-1.9), and esophageal varices (OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.7-3.0). There was a significant difference in the probability of repeat EGD by VA region, with the Midwest region having the highest probability (31.2%) and Southeast the lowest probability (27.3%). This difference would account for 400 more EGD procedures per 10,000 Veterans, after adjusting for patient demographics and diagnosis codes.

CONCLUSIONS

Regional practice variability accounts for a substantial volume of repeat EGD procedures, regardless of patient characteristics and associated diagnoses.

Longer Observation Time Increases Proportion of Neoplasms Detected by Esophagogastroduodenoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is commonly used to detect upper gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms. However, there is little evidence that longer examination time increases rate of detection of upper GI neoplasia. We investigated the association between length of time spent performing a normal screening EGD and rate of neoplasm detection.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 111,962 subjects who underwent EGD as part of a comprehensive health-screening program from January 2009 to December 2015 in Korea. Endoscopy findings were extracted from reports prepared by 14 board-certified endoscopists. Endoscopists were classified as fast or slow based on their mean examination time for a normal EGD without biopsy during their first year of the study. All endoscopists used the same endoscopy unit. We obtained findings from histologic analyses of GI biopsies from patient records; positive findings were defined as the detection of neoplasms (esophageal, gastric, or duodenal lesions). We examined the association between examination time and proportions of neoplasms detected. The primary outcome measure was the rate of neoplasm detection for each endoscopist (total number of neoplastic lesions detected divided by the number of subjects screened) and as the proportion of subjects with at least 1 neoplastic lesion.

RESULTS

The mean examination time was 2 minutes 53 seconds. Using 3 minutes as a cutoff, we classified 8 endoscopists as fast (mean duration, 2:38 ± 0:21 minutes) and 6 endoscopists as slow (mean duration, 3:25 ± 0:19 minutes). Each endoscopist's mean examination time correlated with their rate of neoplasm detection (R² = 0.54; P = .046). Fast endoscopists identified neoplasms in the upper GI tract in 0.20% of patients, whereas slow endoscopists identified these in 0.28% of patients (P = .0054). The frequency of endoscopic biopsy varied among endoscopists (range, 6.9%-27.8%) and correlated with rate of neoplasm detection (R² = 0.76; P = .0015). On multivariable analysis, slow endoscopists were more likely to detect gastric adenomas or carcinomas than fast endoscopists (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.17-1.97).

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of data from more than 100,000 subjects who underwent EGD in a screening program, we found slow endoscopists detected a higher proportion of neoplasms than fast endoscopists. Examination time is therefore a useful indicator of quality for EGD.

National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program Remains Suboptimal in Korea

Background/Aims

We evaluated the characteristics of the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) and opinions regarding the National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program (NEQIP).

Methods

We surveyed physicians performing esophagogastroduodenoscopy and/or colonoscopy screenings as part of the NCSP via e-mail between July and August in 2015. The 32-item survey instrument included endoscopic capacity, sedation, and reprocessing of endoscopes as well as opinions regarding the NEQIP.

Results

A total of 507 respondents were analyzed after the exclusion of 40 incomplete answers. Under the current capacity of the NCSP, the typical waiting time for screening endoscopy was less than 4 weeks in more than 90% of endoscopy units. Performance of endoscopy reprocessing was suboptimal, with 28% of respondents using unapproved disinfectants or not knowing the main ingredient of their disinfectants and 15% to 17% of respondents not following reprocessing protocols. Agreement with the NEQIP was optimal, because only 5.7% of respondents did not agree with NEQIP; however, familiarity with the NEQIP was suboptimal, because only 37.3% of respondents were familiar with the NEQIP criteria.

Conclusions

The NEQ-IP remains suboptimal in Korea. Given the suboptimal performance of endoscopy reprocessing and low familiarity with the NEQIP, improved quality in endoscopy reprocessing and better understanding of the NEQIP should be emphasized in Korea.

The learning curve to achieve satisfactory completion rates in upper GI endoscopy: an analysis of a national training database

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the number of OGDs (oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopies) trainees need to perform to acquire competency in terms of successful unassisted completion to the second part of the duodenum 95% of the time.

DESIGN

OGD data were retrieved from the trainee e-portfolio developed by the Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy (JAG) in the UK. All trainees were included unless they were known to have a baseline experience of >20 procedures or had submitted data for <20 procedures. The primary outcome measure was OGD completion, defined as passage of the endoscope to the second part of the duodenum without physical assistance. The number of OGDs required to achieve a 95% completion rate was calculated by the moving average method and learning curve cumulative summation (LC-Cusum) analysis. To determine which factors were independently associated with OGD completion, a mixed effects logistic regression model was constructed with OGD completion as the outcome variable.

RESULTS

Data were analysed for 1255 trainees over 288 centres, representing 243 555 OGDs. By moving average method, trainees attained a 95% completion rate at 187 procedures. By LC-Cusum analysis, after 200 procedures, >90% trainees had attained a 95% completion rate. Total number of OGDs performed, trainee age and experience in lower GI endoscopy were factors independently associated with OGD completion.

CONCLUSIONS

There are limited published data on the OGD learning curve. This is the largest study to date analysing the learning curve for competency acquisition. The JAG competency requirement for 200 procedures appears appropriate.

How to Improve the Quality of Screening Endoscopy in Korea: National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program

In Korea, gastric cancer screening, either esophagogastroduodenoscopy or upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS), is performed biennially for adults aged 40 years or older. Screening endoscopy has been shown to be associated with localized cancer detection and better than UGIS. However, the diagnostic sensitivity of detecting cancer is not satisfactory. The National Endoscopy Quality Improvement (QI) program was initiated in 2009 to enhance the quality of medical institutions and improve the effectiveness of the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP). The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy developed quality standards through a broad systematic review of other endoscopic quality guidelines and discussions with experts. The standards comprise five domains: qualifications of endoscopists, endoscopic unit facilities and equipment, endoscopic procedure, endoscopy outcomes, and endoscopic reprocessing. After 5 years of the QI program, feedback surveys showed that the perception of QI and endoscopic practice improved substantially in all domains of quality, but the quality standards need to be revised. How to avoid missing cancer in endoscopic procedures in daily practice was reviewed, which can be applied to the mass screening endoscopy. To improve the quality and effectiveness of NCSP, key performance indicators, acceptable quality standards, regular audit, and appropriate reimbursement are necessary.