Document Type

Article

Publication Date

12-18-2025

Comments

This article is the author’s final published version in iGIE, Volume 4, Issue 4, 2025, Pages 338-344.e3.

The published version is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.igie.2025.09.003. Copyright © 2025 The Author(s).

 

Abstract

Background and Aims The lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has revolutionized endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). However, there is a paucity of data on the optimal approaches to training on the use of LAMSs. This survey study aimed to evaluate the status of training in LAMSs among advanced endoscopy fellowship (AEF) trainees. Methods AEF (academic year 2023-2024) trainees were invited to complete a 15-question survey on LAMS training. The questions included the following domains: demographics, exposure to LAMSs before AEF, number of observed and hands-on participation using LAMSs for EUS-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage (EUS-PFCD), choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CD), gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), and gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) and EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (EDGE). Trainees were asked about their level of confidence in performing these procedures independently upon completion of their AEF. Results Forty-three of 92 trainees completed the survey. Trainees reported performing a median of 400 (interquartile range [IQR], 305-525) EUS and 405 (IQR, 345-500) endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures. Most (88.4%) had exposure to hands-on LAMS training in explant/inanimate models during their AEF. More than one-half of trainees (23; 53.5%) reported hands-on participating in >10 EUS-PFCD cases but ≤2 for each of the non-pancreatic fluid collection drainage (PFCD) indications. Although most trainees (88.4%) reported feeling confident in their ability to perform EUS-PFCD independently, only 34.9% and 39.6% indicated being confident for EUS-GJ and EUS-CD, respectively. Trainees who were confident had a significantly greater mean number of hands-on cases during AEF training when compared with their nonconfident counterparts. Conclusions This study demonstrates significant variability in LAMS training exposure during AEF, with few hands-on opportunities for non-PFCD indications. Additional research is needed to establish optimal approaches to training in LAMS procedures.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Language

English

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.