Background and study aims Training in endoscopy is a key objective of gastroenterology residency. There is currently no standardized or systematic training approach. This study evaluated and... Show moreBackground and study aims Training in endoscopy is a key objective of gastroenterology residency. There is currently no standardized or systematic training approach. This study evaluated and compared the current status of gastrointestinal endoscopy training programs in all teaching hospitals in the Netherlands from a resident perspective.Materials and methods A national online survey with open and closed questions on gastrointestinal endoscopy training was administered to all gastroenterology residents (N = 180) in the eight educational regions in the Netherlands.Results One hundred residents who had already started endoscopy training were included in the analyses. Sixty-five residents (65 %) were satisfied with their endoscopy training program. Participation in a preclinical endoscopy course was mandatory in seven of eight educational regions. Residents from the region without a mandatory endoscopy training course were significantly less likely to be satisfied with their endoscopy training program (32 %, P = .011). Criteria used to determine the level of supervision differed greatly between teaching hospitals (e. g. assessed endoscopy competence, predefined period of time or number of procedures). Only 26 residents (26 %) reported uniformity in teaching methods and styles between different supervising gastroenterologists in their teaching hospital.Conclusions Although most gastroenterology residents were satisfied with the endoscopy training program and endoscopy supervision in their teaching hospital, this study identified considerable local and regional variability. Future studies should be conducted to evaluate the trainers’ perspective and trainers’ behavior during endoscopy training sessions, which might eventually lead to the development of best practices regarding endoscopy training, including standardization of training programs and supervision methods. Show less
Goggins, M.; Overbeek, K.A.; Brand, R.; Syngal, S.; Chiaro, M. del; Bartsch, D.K.; ... ; Int Canc Pancreas Screening 2020
CDKN2A-p16-Leiden mutation carriers have a substantial risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). One of the main clinical features of hereditary cancer is the development of... Show moreCDKN2A-p16-Leiden mutation carriers have a substantial risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). One of the main clinical features of hereditary cancer is the development of multiple cancers. Since 2000, we have run a surveillance program for CDKN2A-p16-Leiden mutation carriers. The patients are offered a yearly MRI with optionally endoscopic ultrasound. In patients with a confirmed lesion, usually, a partial resection of the pancreas is recommended. A total of 18 PDAC (8.3%) were detected in 218 mutation carriers. In this report, we describe two CDKN2A-p16-Leiden patients with a synchronous and metachronous PDAC. Including two previously-reported cases, we identified four patients with multiple PDAC: two of 18 patients within the surveillance program (11%) and two patients with a proven CDKN2A-p16-Leiden mutation not participating in the surveillance program. In conclusion, this study demonstrated a high risk of developing multiple PDAC in CDKN2A-p16-Leiden mutation carriers. After detecting a primary tumor, it is very important to exclude the presence of a second synchronous tumor. Moreover, after a partial pancreatectomy for PDAC, close surveillance is necessary. In view of the current findings, offering a total pancreatectomy might be an appropriate option in patients with an early PDAC. Show less
