nach oben

Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology

Erschienen in:

25.06.2020 | Endoscopy (P Siersema, Section Editor)

What Is the Optimal Surveillance Strategy for Non-dysplastic Barrett’s Esophagus?

verfasst von: Ying Gibbens, MD, PhD, Prasad G. Iyer, MD MSc

Erschienen in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose of review

There is conflicting data on the effectiveness of the currently recommended endoscopic surveillance strategy in non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus (BE) patients. We reviewed the literature to evaluate the (cost) effectiveness of the current surveillance strategy. We also reviewed critical strategies and new technologies that could improve dysplasia detection.

Recent findings

Adherence to the current EGD surveillance guidelines is suboptimal with high rates of missed dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The influence of surveillance on EAC mortality appears modest. Careful cleansing, inspection, and sampling of the BE mucosa using high-resolution white light (electronic) chromoendoscopy are critical. Newer sampling techniques coupled with computer aided diagnosis and emerging imaging technologies have shown promise in improving dysplasia detection. Personalized surveillance with risk stratification based on risk factors for progression may be on the horizon.

Summary

Current BE surveillance strategy will likely be further refined and optimized by emerging new technologies in tissue sampling, advanced imaging, and risk stratification.

Pennathur A, Gibson MK, Jobe BA, Luketich JD. Oesophageal carcinoma. Lancet. 2013;381:400–12.PubMed

Rubenstein JH, Shaheen NJ. Epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2015;149:302–17.PubMed

Peters Y, Honing J, Kievit W, Kestens C, Pestman W, Nagtegaal ID, et al. Incidence of progression of persistent nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus to malignancy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;17:869–77.PubMed

Shaheen N, Falk G, Iyer P, Gerson L. ACG clinical guideline: diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111:30–50.PubMed

American Gastroenterological Association Medical Position Statement on the Management of Barrett’s Esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2011;140:1084–91.

Fitzgerald RC, di Pietro M, Ragunath K, Ang Y, Kang J-Y, Watson P, et al. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2014;63:7–42.PubMed

Hvid-Jensen F, Pedersen L, Drewes AM, Sørensen HT, Funch-Jensen P. Incidence of adenocarcinoma among patients with Barrett’s esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1375–83.PubMed

Wani S, Falk G, Hall M, Gaddam S, Wang A, Gupta N, et al. Patients with nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus have low risks for developing dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:220–7.PubMed

Desai TK, Krishnan K, Samala N, Singh J, Cluley J, Perla S, et al. The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2012;61:970–6.PubMed

10.

Theron BT, Padmanabhan H, Aladin H, Smith P, Campbell E, Nightingale P, et al. The risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in a prospectively recruited Barrett’s oesophagus cohort. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2016;4:754–61.

11.

El-Serag HB, Naik AD, Duan Z, Shakhatreh M, Helm A, Pathak A, et al. Surveillance endoscopy is associated with improved outcomes of oesophageal adenocarcinoma detected in patients with Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2016;65:1252–60.PubMed

12.

Verbeek R, Leenders M, ten Kate F, van Hillegersberg R, Vleggaar F, van Baal J, et al. Surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus and mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma: a population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1215–22.PubMed

13.

Corley DA, Mehtani K, Quesenberry C, Zhao W, de Boer J, Weiss NS. Impact of endoscopic surveillance on mortality from Barrett’s esophagus-associated esophageal adenocarcinomas. Gastroenterology. 2013;145:312–9.PubMed

14.

•• Codipilly DC, Chandar AK, Singh S, Wani S, Shaheen NJ, Inadomi JM, et al. The effect of endoscopic surveillance in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2018;154:2068–86 It is a thorough meta-analysis on surveillance on EAC- and overall mortality on NDBE patients. This study also showed that adjusting lead- and length-time biases attenuated the mortality benefit conferred by endoscopic surveillance.PubMed

15.

Old O, Moayyedi P, Love S, Roberts C, Hapeshi J, Foy C, et al. Barrett’s oesophagus surveillance versus endoscopy at need Study (BOSS): protocol and analysis plan for a multicentre randomized controlled trial. J Med Screen. 2015;22:158–64.PubMed

16.

Abrams JA, Kapel RC, Lindberg GM, Saboorian MH, Genta RM, Neugut AI, et al. Adherence to biopsy guidelines for Barrett’s esophagus surveillance in the community setting in the United States. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:736–42.PubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Westerveld D, Khullar V, Mramba L, Ayoub F, Brar T, Agarwal M, et al. Adherence to quality indicators and surveillance guidelines in the management of Barrett’s esophagus: a retrospective analysis. Endosc Int Open. 2018;6:E300–7.PubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Tavakkoli A, Appelman HD, Beer DG, Madiyal C, Khodadost M, Nofz K, et al. Use of appropriate surveillance for patients with non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16:862–9.PubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Wani S, Williams JL, Komanduri S, Muthusamy VR, Shaheen NJ. Over-utilization of repeat upper endoscopy in patients with non-dysplastic Barrettʼs esophagus: a quality registry study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2019;114:1256–64.PubMed

20.

Abela J-E, Going JJ, Mackenzie JF, McKernan M, O’Mahoney S, Stuart RC. Systematic four-quadrant biopsy detects Barrett’s dysplasia in more patients than nonsystematic biopsy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:850–5.PubMed

21.

van Putten M, Johnston BT, Murray LJ, Gavin AT, McManus DT, Bhat S, et al. ‘Missed’ oesophageal adenocarcinoma and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus patients: a large population-based study. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2018;6:519–28.

22.

Visrodia K, Singh S, Krishnamoorthi R, Ahlquist DA, Wang KK, Iyer PG, et al. Magnitude of missed esophageal adenocarcinoma after Barrett’s esophagus diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2016;150:599–607.PubMed

23.

Inadomi JM, Saxena N. Screening and surveillance for Barrett’s esophagus: is it cost-effective? Dig Dis Sci. 2018;63:2094–104.PubMed

24.

Inadomi JM, Sampliner R, Lagergren J, Lieberman D, Fendrick AM, Vakil N. Screening and surveillance for Barrett esophagus in high-risk groups: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:176–86.PubMed

25.

Kastelein F, van Olphen S, Steyerberg EW, Sikkema M, Spaander MCW, Looman CWN, et al. Surveillance in patients with long-segment Barrett’s oesophagus: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Gut. 2015;64:864–71.PubMed

26.

Gordon LG, Mayne GC, Hirst NG, Bright T, Whiteman DC, Watson DI. Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance of non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79:242–56.PubMed

27.

Cameron AJ, Carpenter HA. Barrett’s esophagus, high-grade dysplasia, and early adenocarcinoma: a pathological study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;92:586–91.PubMed

28.

Swager A, Curvers WL, Bergman JJ. Diagnosis by endoscopy and advanced imaging. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2015;29:97–111.PubMed

29.

Gupta N, Gaddam S, Wani SB, Bansal A, Rastogi A, Sharma P. Longer inspection time is associated with increased detection of high-grade dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:531–8.PubMed

30.

• Bergman JJGHM, de Groof AJ, Pech O, Ragunath K, Armstrong D, Mostafavi N, et al. An interactive web-based educational tool improves detection and delineation of Barrett’s esophagus–related neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2019;156:1299–308 First web-based education tool to improve dysplasia detection.PubMed

31.

Cassani L, Sumner E, Slaughter JC, Yachimski P. Directional distribution of neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus is not influenced by distance from the gastroesophageal junction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;77:877–82.PubMed

32.

Kariyawasam VC, Bourke MJ, Hourigan LF, Lim G, Moss A, Williams SJ, et al. Circumferential location predicts the risk of high-grade dysplasia and early adenocarcinoma in short-segment Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:938–44.PubMed

33.

Cotton CC, Duits LC, Wolf AW, Peery AF, Dellon ES, Bergman JJ, et al. Spatial predisposition of dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus segments: a pooled analysis of the SURF and AIM dysplasia trials. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110:1412–9.PubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Otaki F, Iyer PG. Point–counterpoint: screening and surveillance for Barrett’s esophagus, is it worthwhile? Dig Dis Sci. 2018;63:2081–93.PubMed

35.

Gross SA, Smith MS, Kaul V. Increased detection of Barrett’s esophagus and esophageal dysplasia with adjunctive use of wide-area transepithelial sample with three-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS). United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2018;6:529–35.

36.

• Vennalaganti PR, Kaul V, Wang KK, Falk GW, Shaheen NJ, Infantolino A, et al. Increased detection of Barrett’s esophagus-associated neoplasia using wide-area trans-epithelial sampling: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87:348–55 A RCT demonstrated the improvement on dysplasia detection using WATS.PubMed

37.

• Smith MS, Ikonomi E, Bhuta R, Iorio N, Kataria RD, Kaul V, et al. Wide-area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted 3-dimensional analysis (WATS) markedly improves detection of esophageal dysplasia and Barrett’s esophagus: analysis from a prospective multicenter community-based study. Dis Esophagus. 2019;32(3). https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doy115 A large scale multi-center study showed WATS resulted in a substantial increase in dysplasia detection rate.

38.

Qumseya B, Sultan S, Bain P, Jamil L, Jacobson B, Anandasabapathy S, et al. ASGE guideline on screening and surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;90:335–59.PubMed

39.

Manfredi MA, Abu Dayyeh BK, Bhat YM, Chauhan SS, Gottlieb KT, Hwang JH, et al. Electronic chromoendoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:249–61.PubMed

40.

Qumseya BJ, Wang H, Badie N, Uzomba RN, Parasa S, White DL, et al. Advanced imaging technologies increase detection of dysplasia and neoplasia in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:1562–70.PubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Wolfsen HC, Crook JE, Krishna M, Achem SR, Devault KR, Bouras EP, et al. Prospective, controlled tandem endoscopy study of narrow band imaging for dysplasia detection in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:24–31.PubMed

42.

• Swager A-F, Tearney GJ, Leggett CL, van Oijen MGH, Meijer SL, Weusten BL, et al. Identification of volumetric laser endomicroscopy features predictive for early neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus using high-quality histological correlation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:918–26 This study identified VLE features that are highly correlate with neoplasia and used these features to develop a scoring system for cancer prediction.PubMed

43.

Swager A-F, de Groof AJ, Meijer SL, Weusten BL, Curvers WL, Bergman JJ. Feasibility of laser marking in Barrett’s esophagus with volumetric laser endomicroscopy: first-in-man pilot study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;86:464–72.PubMed

44.

Wolfsen HC, Sharma P, Wallace MB, Leggett C, Tearney G, Wang KK. Safety and feasibility of volumetric laser endomicroscopy in patients with Barrett’s esophagus (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82:631–40.PubMed

45.

• Smith MS, Cash B, Konda V, Trindade AJ, Gordon S, DeMeester S, et al. Volumetric laser endomicroscopy and its application to Barrett’s esophagus: results from a 1,000 patient registry. Dis Esophagus. 2019;32(9). https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doz029 This study established the clinical feasibility and potential of VLE in improving dysplasia evaluation.

46.

van der Sommen F, Zinger S, Curvers W, Bisschops R, Pech O, Weusten B, et al. Computer-aided detection of early neoplastic lesions in Barrett’s esophagus. Endoscopy. 2016;48:617–24.PubMed

47.

• de Groof AJ, Struyvenberg MR, van der Putten J, van der Sommen F, Fockens KN, Curvers WL, et al. Deep-learning system detects neoplasia in patients with Barrett’s esophagus with higher accuracy than endoscopists in a multistep training and validation study with benchmarking. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:915–29 This study measured the performance of AI in detecting neoplasia and compared it with endoscopists.PubMed

48.

• Hashimoto R, Requa J, Tyler D, Ninh A, Tran E, Mai D, et al. Artificial intelligence using convolutional neural networks for real-time detection of early esophageal neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.049 The AI in this study showed excellent performance in accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.

49.

Trindade AJ, McKinley MJ, Fan C, Leggett CL, Kahn A, Pleskow DK. Endoscopic surveillance of barrett’s esophagus using volumetric laser endomicroscopy with artificial intelligence image enhancement. Gastroenterology. 2019;157:303–5.PubMed

50.

Pohl H, Wrobel K, Bojarski C, Voderholzer W, Sonnenberg A, Rösch T, et al. Risk factors in the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:200–7.PubMed

51.

Parasa S, Vennalaganti S, Gaddam S, Vennalaganti P, Young P, Gupta N, et al. Development and validation of a model to determine risk of progression of Barrett’s esophagus to neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2018;154:1282–9.PubMed

52.

Holmberg D, Ness-Jensen E, Mattsson F, Lagergren J. Clinical prediction model for tumor progression in Barrett’s esophagus. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:2901–8.PubMed

53.

• Krishnamoorthi R, Singh S, Ragunathan K, Visrodia K, Wang KK, Katzka DA, et al. Factors associated with progression of Barrett’s esophagus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16:1046–55 It is a comprehensive meta-analysis on risk factors that are associated with cancer progression in BE.PubMed

54.

Gaddam S, Singh M, Balasubramanian G, Thota P, Gupta N, Wani S, et al. Persistence of nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus identifies patients at lower risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma: results from a large multicenter cohort. Gastroenterology. 2013;145:548–53.PubMed

55.

Krishnamoorthi R, Ramos GP, Crews N, Johnson M, Dierkhising R, Shi Q, et al. Persistence of nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus is not protective against progression to adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15:950–2.PubMed

56.

Nguyen T, Thrift AP, Yu X, Duan Z, El-Serag HB. The annual risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma does not decrease over time in patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2017;112:1049–55.PubMed

57.

Abdelmessih R, Packey CD, Lawlor G. Endoscopy in the elderly: a cautionary approach, when to stop. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2016;14:305–14.PubMed

Titel: What Is the Optimal Surveillance Strategy for Non-dysplastic Barrett’s Esophagus?
verfasst von: Ying Gibbens, MD, PhD
Prasad G. Iyer, MD MSc
Publikationsdatum: 25.06.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology / Ausgabe 3/2020
Print ISSN: 1092-8472
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-309X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-020-00297-9

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

What Is the Optimal Surveillance Strategy for Non-dysplastic Barrett’s Esophagus?

Abstract

Purpose of review

Recent findings

Summary

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

Europäische Ernährungsgewohnheiten: Das sind die häufigsten Fehler

Drei Mythen bei der Antibiotikatherapie

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

Update Innere Medizin

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose of review

Recent findings

Summary

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Inflammatory Bowel Disease Therapy and Venous Thromboembolism

Novel Therapeutics for the Treatment of IBD: Current Status and Future Directions

Gastritis: An Update in 2020

Enteric Hyperoxaluria and Kidney Stone Management in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Evidence Supporting High-Dose Use of Biologics in Clinical Practice

Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding Due to Colonic Source

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

Europäische Ernährungsgewohnheiten: Das sind die häufigsten Fehler

Drei Mythen bei der Antibiotikatherapie

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

Update Innere Medizin