Training in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration: Safety and Diagnostic Yield of Attending Supervised, Trainee-Directed FNA from the Onset of Training.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy Pub Date : 2011-01-01 Epub Date: 2011-11-24 DOI:10.1155/2011/378540
Gregory A Coté, Christine E Hovis, Cara Kohlmeier, Tarek Ammar, Abed Al-Lehibi, Riad R Azar, Steven A Edmundowicz, Daniel K Mullady, Hannah Krigman, Lourdes Ylagan, Michael Hull, Dayna S Early
{"title":"Training in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration: Safety and Diagnostic Yield of Attending Supervised, Trainee-Directed FNA from the Onset of Training.","authors":"Gregory A Coté,&nbsp;Christine E Hovis,&nbsp;Cara Kohlmeier,&nbsp;Tarek Ammar,&nbsp;Abed Al-Lehibi,&nbsp;Riad R Azar,&nbsp;Steven A Edmundowicz,&nbsp;Daniel K Mullady,&nbsp;Hannah Krigman,&nbsp;Lourdes Ylagan,&nbsp;Michael Hull,&nbsp;Dayna S Early","doi":"10.1155/2011/378540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background. The optimal time to initiate hands-on training in endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is unclear. We studied the feasibility of initiating EUS-FNA training concurrent with EUS training. Methods. Three supervised trainees were instructed on EUS-FNA technique and allowed hands-on exposure from the onset of training. The trainee and attending each performed passes in no particular order. During trainee FNA, the attending provided verbal instruction as needed but no hands-on assistance. A blinded cytopathologist assessed the adequacy (cellularity) and diagnostic yield of individual passes. Primary outcomes compared cellularity and diagnostic yield of attending versus fellow FNA passes. Results. We analyzed 305 FNA sites, including pancreas (51.2%), mediastinal/upper abdominal lymph node (LN) (28.5%) and others (20.3%). The average proportion of fellow passes with AC was similar to attending FNA-pancreas: 70.3 versus 68.8%; LN: 79.0 versus 81.7%; others 65.5 versus 68.7%; P > 0.05); these did not change significantly during the training period. Among cases with confirmed malignancy (n = 179), the sensitivity of EUS-FNA was 78.8% (68.4% fellow-only versus 69.6% attending only). There were no EUS-FNA complications. Conclusions. When initiated at the onset of EUS training, attending-supervised, trainee-directed FNA is safe and has comparable performance characteristics to attending FNA.</p>","PeriodicalId":11288,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","volume":"2011 ","pages":"378540"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2011/378540","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/378540","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/11/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

Background. The optimal time to initiate hands-on training in endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is unclear. We studied the feasibility of initiating EUS-FNA training concurrent with EUS training. Methods. Three supervised trainees were instructed on EUS-FNA technique and allowed hands-on exposure from the onset of training. The trainee and attending each performed passes in no particular order. During trainee FNA, the attending provided verbal instruction as needed but no hands-on assistance. A blinded cytopathologist assessed the adequacy (cellularity) and diagnostic yield of individual passes. Primary outcomes compared cellularity and diagnostic yield of attending versus fellow FNA passes. Results. We analyzed 305 FNA sites, including pancreas (51.2%), mediastinal/upper abdominal lymph node (LN) (28.5%) and others (20.3%). The average proportion of fellow passes with AC was similar to attending FNA-pancreas: 70.3 versus 68.8%; LN: 79.0 versus 81.7%; others 65.5 versus 68.7%; P > 0.05); these did not change significantly during the training period. Among cases with confirmed malignancy (n = 179), the sensitivity of EUS-FNA was 78.8% (68.4% fellow-only versus 69.6% attending only). There were no EUS-FNA complications. Conclusions. When initiated at the onset of EUS training, attending-supervised, trainee-directed FNA is safe and has comparable performance characteristics to attending FNA.

Abstract Image

eus引导下的细针抽吸培训:从培训开始就参加有监督的、学员指导的FNA的安全性和诊断率。
背景。内镜超声细针抽吸(EUS-FNA)的最佳培训时间尚不清楚。我们研究了在EUS训练的同时启动EUS- fna训练的可行性。方法。三名受监督的受训者接受了EUS-FNA技术的指导,并允许从培训开始就亲自接触。学员和主治医生都没有特定的顺序。在受训FNA期间,主治医师根据需要提供口头指导,但不提供实际帮助。盲法细胞病理学家评估了单个通过的充分性(细胞数量)和诊断率。主要结果比较了出席者和其他FNA通过者的细胞数量和诊断率。结果。我们分析了305个FNA部位,包括胰腺(51.2%)、纵隔/上腹部淋巴结(LN)(28.5%)和其他部位(20.3%)。AC患者的平均比例与fna -胰腺患者相似:70.3 vs 68.8%;LN: 79.0 vs 81.7%;其他65.5%对68.7%;P > 0.05);这些在训练期间没有显著变化。在确诊为恶性肿瘤的病例中(n = 179), EUS-FNA的敏感性为78.8%(仅为68.4%,仅为69.6%)。无EUS-FNA并发症。结论。当在EUS培训开始时,由学员指导的、由学员监督的FNA是安全的,并且具有与参加FNA相当的性能特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信