ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02838498Updated Jul 11, 2019

Practice With Simulator Improves Basic ERCP Skills of Surgical Trainees

An interventional study of ERCP Mechanical Simulator (EMS) in Hands-on Training, sponsored by Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province. Completed at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 26 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-07-11.

Sponsored by Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
12
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
26 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

To test the benefits of ERCP Mechanical Simulator (EMS) practice in improving ERCP cannulation success rate of novice surgical trainees.

Read the detailed description

Practicing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures using the EMS provides opportunities for novice endoscopists to learn basic ERCP skills without a patient. In two randomized controlled trials (RCT), coached EMS practice increased selective bile duct cannulation success rate of novice endoscopists. Surgical trainees do not have sufficient endoscopy experience to meet the perceived basic requirement for ERCP training. However, ERCP is done with a side-viewing scope and even experienced GI trainees have difficult initially mastering the basic skill with scope manipulation and cannulation. It is not known whether EMS can provide additional benefit to novice surgical ERCP trainees.

02

Conditions studied

  • Hands-on Training

Keywords

  • ERCP
  • EMS
  • Cannulation
  • Successful rate
  • Trainee
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province is the lead sponsor of 44 studies on the registry; 8 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
26 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • No experienced surgical trainees receiving ERCP training

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Experienced surgical ERCP trainees or who are not receiving ERCP training
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
12 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intensive EMS training group

    Device: ERCP mechanical simulator training EMS group was coached (by JWL) on how to use the EMS, and then practiced with supervision by a senior surgeon biliary endoscopist (WBM). Trainees practiced for a total of 20 hours performing basic maneuvers including scope insertion 2 hours, scope positioning 6 hours, selective guide wire cannulation of common bile duct (CBD) stricture or pancreatic duct (PD) 10 hours and placement of a biliary stent 2 hours. All trainees received hands-on supervised clinical ERCP practice on patients. Time taken to perform ERCP procedures was documented. Trainees received verbal instructions, hands-on assistance from the trainer in performing the clinical procedure. If the trainee still failed after 20 minutes, the trainer took over.

    Device: ERCP Mechanical Simulator (EMS)

  • No intervention
    Routine ERCP training group

    Other: Routine ERCP training group All trainees received hands-on supervised clinical ERCP practice on patients. Time taken to perform ERCP procedures was documented. Trainees received verbal instructions, hands-on assistance from the trainer in performing the clinical procedure. If the trainee still failed after 20 minutes, the trainer took over.

Interventions

  • DeviceERCP Mechanical Simulator (EMS)

    Hands on EMS training

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Success rate of bile duct cannulation

    Trainees received verbal instructions, hands-on assistance from the trainer no more than three times in performing the clinical procedure. The trainer took over if the trainee still failed after 20 minutes.

    Time frame: 12 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Intubation time before cannulation

    during the scope explored to cannulation

    Time frame: 12 months

  2. Successful cannulation time from first achieve the papilla

    the time between the first achieve the papilla to cannulate successfully

    Time frame: 12 months

  3. Total time

    From scope explored to withdraw

    Time frame: 12 months

  4. performance score of selective cannulation

    The ability of trainees to perform solo diagnostic biliary cannulation and deep cannulation

    Time frame: 12 months

  5. Complication rate

    The rate of major complications

    Time frame: 12 months

  6. Trainer assessment

    Subjective competency graded by supervising physicians as above average, average or below average based on objective criteria.

    Time frame: 12 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province
    Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Liao WC, Leung JW, Wang HP, Chang WH, Chu CH, Lin JT, Wilson RE, Lim BS, Leung FW. Coached practice using ERCP mechanical simulator improves trainees' ERCP performance: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy. 2013 Oct;45(10):799-805. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1344224. Epub 2013 Jul 29. PubMed 23897401 ↗
  • Lim BS, Leung JW, Lee J, Yen D, Beckett L, Tancredi D, Leung FW. Effect of ERCP mechanical simulator (EMS) practice on trainees' ERCP performance in the early learning period: US multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011 Feb;106(2):300-6. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.411. Epub 2010 Oct 26. PubMed 20978485 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
Not marked actual or estimatedDates not marked actual or estimated

The record gives a start of Jul 2016, a primary completion of Dec 2018 and a completion of Dec 2018. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jul 17, 2016
First posted
Jul 20, 2016
Start
Jul 2016
Primary completionActual
Dec 26, 2018
CompletionActual
Dec 26, 2018
Last update
Jul 11, 2019
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 11, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02838498
Lead sponsor
Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 20, 2016
Start date
Jul 2016
Primary completion
Dec 26, 2018
Completion
Dec 26, 2018
Last update
Jul 11, 2019

Study contacts

Xun Li, M.D., Ph. D.
principal investigator · Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion