Article Text

Download PDFPDF
National survey of UK endoscopists showing variation in diathermy practice for colonic polypectomy: a JAG perspective
  1. Keith Siau1,2,3,
  2. Aravinth Murugananthan1,4,
  3. Paul Dunckley1,5,
  4. Geoffrey V Smith1,6,
  5. Siwan Thomas-Gibson1,7,8
  1. 1 Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Royal College of Physicians, London, London, UK
  2. 2 College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  3. 3 Endoscopy Unit, Dudley Group Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, UK
  4. 4 Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
  5. 5 Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, Gloucester, Gloucestershire, UK
  6. 6 Department of Gastroenterology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
  7. 7 Wolfson Endoscopy Unit, St Marks Hospital, Harrow, UK
  8. 8 Imperial College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Keith Siau, Endoscopy Unit, Dudley Group Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, UK ; keith{at}siau.org

Statistics from Altmetric.com

We applaud Verma and Chilton1 for publishing their survey on diathermy use for polypectomy which provides evidence of variation in UK practice. On behalf of Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG),2 the UK quality assurance body for endoscopy, we wish to share our proposals of future workstreams pertinent to diathermy.

Patient safety should be at the forefront of endoscopy practice. Diathermy is a modality which, if delivered inappropriately, has the potential for serious harm. It is recognised that both efficacy and safety of polypectomy vary between endoscopists.3 4 Although such heterogeneity may be explained by individual approaches to polypectomy,5 insights specific to diathermy are now elucidated in this survey. The accruing evidence supports the need for greater standardisation of training in polypectomy and diathermy …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors KS: drafted the initial manuscript. AM, PD, GVS and ST-G: refined the content, ensured the integrity of the document in relation to JAG’s views and approved the final version.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests All authors are affiliated with the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG). KS and PD are members of the JAG and National Endoscopy Database committee, AM is leading the national review of colonoscopy and polypectomy certification, GVS is chair of the JAG quality Assurance of training working group and ST-G is the chair of JAG.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.