Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36861508›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Three-year evaluation of a novel, nonfluoroscopic, all-artificial model for EUS-guided biliary drainage training for the impact to practice: A prospective observational study (with videos).

Tanyaporn Chantarojanasiri, Aroon Siripun, Pradermchai Kongkam, Nonthalee Pausawasdi, Thawee Ratanachu-Ek

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Tanyaporn ChantarojanasiriThai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Rajavithi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Aroon SiripunThai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Department of Gastroenterology, Bangkok Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pradermchai KongkamThai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Excellence Center for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Thai Red Cross Society; Division of Hospital and Ambulatory Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Pancreas Research Unit, and Tropical Medicine Cluster, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nonthalee PausawasdiThai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thawee Ratanachu-EkThai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Digestive Endoscopy Training Center, Rajavithi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Rajavithi Hospital · THBangkok Hospital · THChulalongkorn University · THSiriraj Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) required a dedicated training. We developed and evaluated a nonfluoroscopic, all-artificial training model known as Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Model 2 (TAGE-2) for the training of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). We hypothesize that trainers and trainees would appreciate the ease of the nonfluoroscopy model and increase their confidence to start their real procedures in humans. Materials and Methods: We prospectively evaluated the TAGE-2 launched in two international EUS hands-on workshops and have followed trainees for 3 years to see long-term outcomes. After completing the training procedure, the participants answered questionnaires to assess their immediate satisfaction of the models in and also the impact of these models on their clinical practice 3 years after the workshop. Results: A total of 28 participants used the EUS-HGS model and 45 participants used the EUS-CDS model. The EUS-HGS model was rated as excellent by 60% of beginners and 40% by experienced and the EUS-CDS model was rated as excellent by 62.5% of beginners and 57.2% of experienced. The majority of trainees (85.7%) have started the EUS-BD procedure in humans without additional training in other models. Conclusion: Our nonfluoroscopic, all-artificial model for EUS-BD training is convenient to be used with good-to-excellent satisfaction scored by the participants in most aspects. It can help the majority of trainees start their procedures in humans without additional training in other models.

Indexed as

biliary drainageEUSevaluationThai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Model 2training model

Identifiers

PMID36861508
PMCPMC10134934
OpenAlexW4303516472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.