Evidence based management of polyps of the gall bladder: A systematic review of the risk factors of malignancy

BACKGROUND

There are no evidence-based guidelines to dictate when Gallbladder Polyps (GBPs) of varying sizes should be resected.

AIM

To identify factors that accurately predict malignant disease in GBP; to provide an evidence-based algorithm for management.

METHODS

A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was performed using terms "gallbladder polyps" AND "polypoid lesion of gallbladder", from January 1993 and September 2013. Inclusion criteria required histopathological report or follow-up of 2 years. RTI-IB tool was used for quality analysis. Correlation with GBP size and malignant potential was analysed using Euclidean distance; a logistics mixed effects model was used for assessing independent risk factors for malignancy.

RESULTS

Fifty-three articles were included in review. Data from 21 studies was pooled for analysis. Optimum size cut-off for resection of GBPs was 10 mm. Probability of malignancy is approximately zero at size <4.15 mm. Patient age >50 years, sessile and single polyps were independent risk factors for malignancy. For polyps sized 4 mm-10 mm, a risk assessment model was formulated.

CONCLUSIONS

This review and analysis has provided an evidence-based algorithm for the management of GBPs. Longitudinal studies are needed to better understand the behaviour of polyps <10 mm, that are not at a high risk of malignancy, but may change over time.

An alternative certification examination ("ACE") in surgery

BACKGROUND

Medical graduates are required to be competent in many domains of professional practice when joining the health care workforce. Current undergraduate examination methods robustly assess up to 5 of these 8 required skills. This study sought to evaluate an alternative certification examination ("ACE") in assessing all of the 8 required domains in surgical cases.

METHODS

A total of 143 final-year medical students were invited to participate in an "ACE" in February 2013. In total, 137 students, 95.8% of the class, agreed to participate. The "ACE" format consisted of 4 sequential patient encounters observed by 2 independent examiners. It assessed all the 8 required domains of professional practice. The examiners and the students evaluated this examination format using a Likert scale and free-text comments.

RESULTS

The "ACE" assessed all the 8 domains. The inclusion of a patient safety measure to avoid an egregious error in the pass criteria resulted in 27 (18.9%) students failing to meet them. The correlation of grades between the independent examiners in the "ACE" was strong at a Cronbach α of 0.907 (CI: 0.766-1). The "ACE" format was reported as an acceptable examination methodology by the examiners for formative or summative assessment of surgical cases at the end of a primary medical degree.

CONCLUSION

The "ACE" format is standardized, is integrative, and has excellent interrater reliability. Inclusion of a patient safety measure as pass criteria appears to increase specificity. The "ACE" shows potential as an alternative examination to the traditional long case examination and objective structured clinical examination in assessing all the 8 domains of professional practice.