超声内镜引导下游离性胰腺坏死引流术中“碎片评估”的观察者间共识

IF 1.2 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.tige.2023.03.003
Partha Pal , Sundeep Lakhtakia , Nitin Jagtap , Shujaath Asif , Krithi Krishna Koduri , Rajesh Gupta , Jahangeer Basha , Azimudin Haja , Aniruddha Pratap Singh , Ashirwad Pasumarthy , Zaheer Nabi , Jagdeesh Rampal Singh , Rakesh Kalpala , Mohan Ramchandani , D Nageshwar Reddy
{"title":"超声内镜引导下游离性胰腺坏死引流术中“碎片评估”的观察者间共识","authors":"Partha Pal ,&nbsp;Sundeep Lakhtakia ,&nbsp;Nitin Jagtap ,&nbsp;Shujaath Asif ,&nbsp;Krithi Krishna Koduri ,&nbsp;Rajesh Gupta ,&nbsp;Jahangeer Basha ,&nbsp;Azimudin Haja ,&nbsp;Aniruddha Pratap Singh ,&nbsp;Ashirwad Pasumarthy ,&nbsp;Zaheer Nabi ,&nbsp;Jagdeesh Rampal Singh ,&nbsp;Rakesh Kalpala ,&nbsp;Mohan Ramchandani ,&nbsp;D Nageshwar Reddy","doi":"10.1016/j.tige.2023.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Aims</h3><p>Estimation of the solid component in walled-off pancreatic necrosis<span> (WOPN) during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an important parameter to guide the selection of stent for drainage but is often not objectively quantified.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We aimed to study the interobserver agreement (IOA) among endosonographers assessing debris in the pancreatic fluid collection and their choice of stent. EUS videos of 15 patients having pancreatic fluid collection with concurrent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment of debris were independently reviewed by 40 endosonographers for the percentage of debris (10% increments) and their choice of stent (plastic or metal). The Fleiss kappa (κ) coefficient was used to assess IOA. Post-hoc analysis was done using wider debris intervals (20% or greater increments).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Poor agreement was observed for the percentage of debris (κ = 0.188), which did not improve (κ = 0.196) even after including only expert endosonographers with more than 10 years of experience (n = 33). There was fair agreement (κ = 0.266) with reference MRI on the percentage of debris. On post-hoc analysis, the IOA (κ = 0.56, substantial agreement) and agreement with MRI (κ = 0.59, substantial agreement) improved as the debris intervals widened (&lt;10%, 10%-50%, &gt;50%). The agreement for stent selection (plastic vs metal) was poor (κ = 0.174) and did not improve with case volume (κ = 0.153 among respondents with &gt;25 EUS-guided drainage/year; n = 21) or years of experience (κ = 0.195 for &gt;10-year experience; n = 33).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>IOA between endosonographers regarding estimation of debris in WOPN and subsequent stent choice for drainage is poor. The experience of endosonographers did not improve IOA. Studies to standardize the EUS criteria for debris assessment in WOPN and subsequent therapeutic approaches are warranted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36169,"journal":{"name":"Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interobserver Agreement on “Assessment of Debris” During Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Drainage of Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis\",\"authors\":\"Partha Pal ,&nbsp;Sundeep Lakhtakia ,&nbsp;Nitin Jagtap ,&nbsp;Shujaath Asif ,&nbsp;Krithi Krishna Koduri ,&nbsp;Rajesh Gupta ,&nbsp;Jahangeer Basha ,&nbsp;Azimudin Haja ,&nbsp;Aniruddha Pratap Singh ,&nbsp;Ashirwad Pasumarthy ,&nbsp;Zaheer Nabi ,&nbsp;Jagdeesh Rampal Singh ,&nbsp;Rakesh Kalpala ,&nbsp;Mohan Ramchandani ,&nbsp;D Nageshwar Reddy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tige.2023.03.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and Aims</h3><p>Estimation of the solid component in walled-off pancreatic necrosis<span> (WOPN) during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an important parameter to guide the selection of stent for drainage but is often not objectively quantified.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We aimed to study the interobserver agreement (IOA) among endosonographers assessing debris in the pancreatic fluid collection and their choice of stent. EUS videos of 15 patients having pancreatic fluid collection with concurrent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment of debris were independently reviewed by 40 endosonographers for the percentage of debris (10% increments) and their choice of stent (plastic or metal). The Fleiss kappa (κ) coefficient was used to assess IOA. Post-hoc analysis was done using wider debris intervals (20% or greater increments).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Poor agreement was observed for the percentage of debris (κ = 0.188), which did not improve (κ = 0.196) even after including only expert endosonographers with more than 10 years of experience (n = 33). There was fair agreement (κ = 0.266) with reference MRI on the percentage of debris. On post-hoc analysis, the IOA (κ = 0.56, substantial agreement) and agreement with MRI (κ = 0.59, substantial agreement) improved as the debris intervals widened (&lt;10%, 10%-50%, &gt;50%). The agreement for stent selection (plastic vs metal) was poor (κ = 0.174) and did not improve with case volume (κ = 0.153 among respondents with &gt;25 EUS-guided drainage/year; n = 21) or years of experience (κ = 0.195 for &gt;10-year experience; n = 33).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>IOA between endosonographers regarding estimation of debris in WOPN and subsequent stent choice for drainage is poor. The experience of endosonographers did not improve IOA. Studies to standardize the EUS criteria for debris assessment in WOPN and subsequent therapeutic approaches are warranted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590030723000272\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590030723000272","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的内镜超声(EUS)中胰腺壁外坏死(WOPN)固体成分的估计是指导引流支架选择的重要参数,但通常无法客观量化。方法我们旨在研究内镜检查者评估胰液收集碎片的观察者间一致性(IOA)及其支架的选择。40名内镜检查人员对15名收集胰腺液并同时进行磁共振成像(MRI)碎片评估的患者的EUS视频进行了独立审查,以了解碎片的百分比(10%的增量)及其支架(塑料或金属)的选择。Fleiss-kappa(κ)系数用于评估IOA。使用更宽的碎片间隔(20%或更大的增量)进行事后分析。结果观察到碎片百分比(κ=0.188)的一致性较差,即使只包括具有10年以上经验的专家内镜医生(n=33),碎片百分比也没有改善(κ=0.196)。在碎片百分比方面,与参考MRI相当一致(κ=0.266)。在事后分析中,IOA(κ=0.56,基本一致)和与MRI的一致性(κ=0.59,基本一致性)随着碎片间隔的扩大而改善(<;10%,10%-50%,>;50%)。支架选择(塑料与金属)的一致性较差(κ=0.174),并且没有随着病例数量的增加而改善(κ=0.153,在EUS引导下引流≥25例/年的受访者中;n=21)或经验年限的增加(κ=0.195,对于>10年的经验;n=33)。内镜医师的经验并没有改善IOA。有必要对WOPN碎片评估的EUS标准和后续治疗方法进行标准化研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Interobserver Agreement on “Assessment of Debris” During Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Drainage of Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis

Background and Aims

Estimation of the solid component in walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an important parameter to guide the selection of stent for drainage but is often not objectively quantified.

Methods

We aimed to study the interobserver agreement (IOA) among endosonographers assessing debris in the pancreatic fluid collection and their choice of stent. EUS videos of 15 patients having pancreatic fluid collection with concurrent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment of debris were independently reviewed by 40 endosonographers for the percentage of debris (10% increments) and their choice of stent (plastic or metal). The Fleiss kappa (κ) coefficient was used to assess IOA. Post-hoc analysis was done using wider debris intervals (20% or greater increments).

Results

Poor agreement was observed for the percentage of debris (κ = 0.188), which did not improve (κ = 0.196) even after including only expert endosonographers with more than 10 years of experience (n = 33). There was fair agreement (κ = 0.266) with reference MRI on the percentage of debris. On post-hoc analysis, the IOA (κ = 0.56, substantial agreement) and agreement with MRI (κ = 0.59, substantial agreement) improved as the debris intervals widened (<10%, 10%-50%, >50%). The agreement for stent selection (plastic vs metal) was poor (κ = 0.174) and did not improve with case volume (κ = 0.153 among respondents with >25 EUS-guided drainage/year; n = 21) or years of experience (κ = 0.195 for >10-year experience; n = 33).

Conclusion

IOA between endosonographers regarding estimation of debris in WOPN and subsequent stent choice for drainage is poor. The experience of endosonographers did not improve IOA. Studies to standardize the EUS criteria for debris assessment in WOPN and subsequent therapeutic approaches are warranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
50.00%
发文量
60
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Table of Contents Editorial Board Table of Contents Editorial Board
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1