ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2025
Adenoma per polypectomy as a training metric in colonoscopy: a retrospective analysis of trainee progression compared to expert performance.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study introduced adenomas per polypectomy (APP) as a novel metric for evaluating the progression of lesion discrimination skills among colonoscopy trainees. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at the National Cancer Center, Korea between March 2020 and February 2023. Nine colorectal surgeons who completed a structured 1-year colonoscopy training program were included, and their performance was compared with that of 5 expert endoscopists. APP was defined as the number of histologically confirmed adenomas among the total number of polypectomies performed. The APPs were calculated serially to assess changes from the beginning to the end of the training. Results: A total of 8,072 colonoscopies were performed by 9 trainees and 11,687 by 5 experts. The average APP of the 9 trainees was 67.0%, which was significantly different from the 73.9% APP of the experts (P < 0.001). The APP progression of trainees exhibited 3 phases: phase 1 (<200 cases) showed increasing polyp detection and APP; phase 2 (200-500 cases) displayed a sharp rise in the number of polypectomies but a decline in APP; and phase 3 (>500 cases) demonstrated a decrease in the number of polypectomies with a moderate rise in APP. However, even in phase 3, the trainees' APP remained significantly lower than that of the experts (69.9% Conclusion: APP, a measure of visual adenoma discrimination ability, undergoes 3 stages of progression during colonoscopy training. This progression suggests that the APP may serve as an additional metric for assessing the effectiveness of colonoscopy training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.