Correlation between endoscopic forceps biopsies and endoscopic mucosal resection with endoscopic ultrasound in patients with Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and early cancer

Multiple staging investigations may not change management in patients with high-grade dysplasia or early esophageal adenocarcinoma

The clinical value of multiple staging investigations for high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is unclear. A single-center prospective cohort of patients treated for early esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2019 was analyzed. This coincided with a transition period from esophagectomy to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the treatment of choice. Patients were staged with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography(PET)/CT. The aim of this study was to assess their accuracy and impact on clinical management. 297 patients with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma were included (endoscopic therapy/EMR n = 184; esophagectomy n = 113 [of which a 'combined' group had surgery preceded by endoscopic therapy n = 23]). Staging accuracy was low (accurate staging EMR: CT 40.1%, EUS 29.6%, FDG-PET/CT 11.0%; Esophagectomy: CT 43.3%, EUS 59.7%, FDG-PET/CT 29.6%; Combined: CT 28.6%, EUS46.2%, FDG-PET/CT 30.0%). Staging inaccuracies across all groups that could have changed management by missing T2 disease were CT 12%, EUS 12% and FDG-PET/CT 1.6%. The sensitivity of all techniques for detecting nodal disease was low (CT 12.5%, EUS 12.5%, FDG-PET/CT0.0%). Overall, FDG-PET/CT and EUS changed decision-making in only 3.2% of patients with an early cancer on CT and low-risk histology. The accuracy of staging with EUS, CT and FDG-PET/CT in patients with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is low. EUS and FDG-PET/CT added relevant staging information over standard CT in very few cases, and therefore, these investigations should be used selectively. Factors predicting the need for esophagectomy are predominantly obtained from EMR histology rather than staging investigations.

Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated Review

Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a change in the distal esophageal mucosal lining, whereby metaplastic columnar epithelium replaces squamous epithelium of the esophagus. This change represents a pre-malignant mucosal transformation which has a known association with the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a risk factor for BE, other risk factors include patients who are Caucasian, age > 50 years, central obesity, tobacco use, history of peptic stricture and erosive gastritis. Screening for BE remains selective based on risk factors, a screening program in the general population is not routinely recommended. Diagnosis of BE is established with a combination of endoscopic recognition, targeted biopsies, and histologic confirmation of columnar metaplasia. We aim to provide a comprehensive review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, screening and advanced techniques of detecting and eradicating Barrett’s esophagus.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal lesions: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

ESGE recommends that the evaluation of superficial gastrointestinal (GI) lesions should be made by an experienced endoscopist, using high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based).ESGE does not recommend routine performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or positron emission tomography (PET)-CT prior to endoscopic resection.ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the treatment of choice for most superficial esophageal squamous cell and superficial gastric lesions.For Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated lesions, ESGE suggests the use of ESD for lesions suspicious of submucosal invasion (Paris type 0-Is, 0-IIc), for malignant lesions > 20 mm, and for lesions in scarred/fibrotic areas.ESGE does not recommend routine use of ESD for duodenal or small-bowel lesions.ESGE suggests that ESD should be considered for en bloc resection of colorectal (but particularly rectal) lesions with suspicion of limited submucosal invasion (demarcated depressed area with irregular surface pattern or a large protruding or bulky component, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm) or for lesions that otherwise cannot be completely removed by snare-based techniques.ESGE recommends that an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with histology no more advanced than intramucosal cancer (no more than m2 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma), well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion or ulceration, should be considered a very low risk (curative) resection, and no further staging procedure or treatment is generally recommended.ESGE recommends that the following should be considered to be a low risk (curative) resection and no further treatment is generally recommended: an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with superficial submucosal invasion (sm1), that is well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion, of size ≤ 20 mm for an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or ≤ 30 mm for a stomach lesion or of any size for a BE-related or colorectal lesion, and with no lymphovascular invasion, and no budding grade 2 or 3 for colorectal lesions.ESGE recommends that, after an endoscopically complete resection, if there is a positive horizontal margin or if resection is piecemeal, but there is no submucosal invasion and no other high risk criteria are met, this should be considered a local-risk resection and endoscopic surveillance or re-treatment is recommended rather than surgery or other additional treatment.ESGE recommends that when there is a diagnosis of lymphovascular invasion, or deeper infiltration than sm1, or positive vertical margins, or undifferentiated tumor, or, for colorectal lesions, budding grade 2 or 3, this should be considered a high risk (noncurative) resection, and complete staging and strong consideration for additional treatments should be considered on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.ESGE recommends scheduled endoscopic surveillance with high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based) with biopsies of only the suspicious areas after a curative ESD.

Endoscopic detection of esophageal low-grade squamous dysplasia: How to predict pathologic upgrades before treatment?

OBJECTIVE

In this study we aimed to predict the risk factors related to histopathologic upgrade after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in patients with pre-ESD esophageal squamous low-grade intraepithelial neoplasm (LGIN).

METHODS

A training cohort of 201 patients with biopsy-confirmed esophageal squamous LGIN and underwent ESD at a tertiary medical center between January 2017 and July 2019 were included. Risk factors for histological upgrade were identified using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. A nomogram was then established. Internal validation was evaluated by discrimination, calibration plot, and decision-curve analysis. Another cohort of 48 patients were prospectively collected from July 2019 to June 2021 for external validation of the nomogram.

RESULTS

The rate of histological upgrade was 34.8% (70/201) and 27.1% (13/48) in the training and validation sets, respectively. LASSO regression identified that tumor area (mm² ) per biopsy, Lugol's staining pattern, background coloration, and the circumferential range of the lesion were significantly associated with histological upgrade. The final nomogram attained favorable prediction efficacy in the training cohort (area under the receiver operating curve [AUROC] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-0.98) and validation cohort (AUROC 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 -0.99). This model generated well-fitted calibration and clinical-decision curves in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The nomogram may better guide clinical decision on whether performing EDS or follow-up for suspicious lesions in patients with biopsy-confirmed esophageal squamous LGIN.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasonography on the accuracy of T staging in esophageal cancer and factors associated with its accuracy: A retrospective study

The sensitivity and specificity of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for esophageal cancer are variable. The aim of the present study was to determine the accuracy of EUS for the T staging of esophageal cancer and to explore the factors that affect the accuracy.This was a retrospective study of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent EUS between January 2018 and September 2019 at the author's hospital. All patients underwent EUS, surgery, and pathological examination. The diagnostic value of ultrasound-based T (uT) staging was evaluated using the pathological T (pT) staging as the gold standard.Finally, 169 patients were included. Among the 169 patients, 37 were overstaged by EUS, 33 were understaged, and 99 were correctly staged. The overall accuracy of EUS was 58.6%. Sensitivity was low, at 0% to 70.8% depending upon the pT stage, but specificity was higher, at 71.0% to 100.0%, also depending upon the pT stage. The multivariable analysis revealed that highly differentiated tumors (odds ratio = 9.167, P = .041) and pT stage ≥T2 (odds ratio = 2.932, P = .004) were independent factors of accurate uT stage.The staging of esophageal cancer using EUS has low sensitivity but high specificity. Highly differentiated tumors and pT stage ≥2 tumors were associated with the accuracy of uT staging.

Early Esophageal Cancer: What the Gastroenterologist Needs to Know

Endoscopic findings in early esophageal cancer are often subtle and require careful inspection and meticulous endoscopic examination. When dysplasia is suspected, we recommend performing 1 or 2 targeted biopsies of the abnormal area and review with a pathologist specialized in evaluating gastrointestinal diseases. In the case of adenocarcinoma, after resection of any visible cancer, residual Barrett's can be treated by ablation. Endoscopic resection can offer the opportunity for patients to avoid surgery. Further studies are needed to evaluate the optimal management of circumferential and near-circumferential lesions as well as tools and techniques to facilitate the performance of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection.

Clinicopathologic correlations of superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma in endoscopic submucosal dissection specimens

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a novel endoscopic treatment for early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The western pathologists’ experience with ESD specimens remains limited. This study aimed to correlate histopathologic features of Barrett’s esophagus (BE)-associated adenocarcinoma in ESD resections with clinical outcomes to determine whether they aid future management decisions.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 49 consecutive ESD resection specimens from 42 patients with BE-associated adenocarcinoma (24 intramucosal and 18 submucosal EAC) at a single tertiary referral center. Pathologic evaluation included presence of dysplasia, invasive adenocarcinoma, peritumoral inflammation, desmoplasia, lymphovascular and perineural invasion; tumor differentiation, depth of invasion, morphology, and budding; and margin status for dysplasia or carcinoma. Follow up data included endoscopic biopsies in 35 patients and pathology reports of esophagectomies in 11 patients. Poor outcomes were defined as recurrence or residual invasive adenocarcinoma at esophagectomy, metastasis on imaging, or R1 resection in patients undergoing ESD for tumor debulking.

Results

Two patients (8%) with intramucosal adenocarcinoma and 9 patients (50%) with submucosal adenocarcinoma had poor outcomes. Histopathologic features associated with poor outcomes included poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion, submucosal invasion > 500 μm, tumor budding, and tubuloinfiltrative histologic pattern. Four patients had positive deep margin away from the deepest tumor invasion and did not show residual tumor on follow up.

Conclusions

Our results validated European Society of Gastroenterology (ESGE) guidelines of high-risk pathologic features for additional therapy in esophageal adenocarcinoma and identified tumor budding frequently in association with other high-risk features. Positive deep margin distant from deepest tumor invasion could be procedural and warrants endoscopic correlation for management.

Echoendoscopy in Preoperative Evaluation of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Gastroesophageal Junction: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Esophageal adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction constitute a global health problem, the incidence of which has increased in recent decades. It has a poor prognosis and a low 5-year survival rate. Its treatment is based on preoperative clinical staging, in which echoendoscopy plays an essential role. The aim of this study was to evaluate the current accuracy of echoendoscopy in the staging of esophageal and esophogogastric junction adenocarcinomas. A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase and Portal BVS using the search terms Esophageal Neoplasm, Esophagus Neoplasms, Esophagus Cancers, Esophageal Cancers, EUS, EUS-FNA, Endoscopic Ultrasonography, Echo Endoscopy, Endosonographies and Endoscopic Ultrasound, with subsequent meta-analysis of the data found. The accuracy of tumor (T) staging was 65.55%. For T1, sensitivity was 64.7%, and specificity 89.1%, with an accuracy of 89.6%. For T2, sensitivity and specificity were 35.7% and 89.2%, respectively, with an accuracy of 87.1%. For T3, sensitivity and specificity were 82.5% and 83%, respectively, with an accuracy of 87%. For T4, sensitivity and specificity were 38.6% and 94%, respectively, with an accuracy of 66.4%. For node (N) staging, sensitivity was 77.3% and specificity 67.4%, with an accuracy of 77.9%. Echoendoscopy exhibits suboptimal accuracy in preoperative staging of esophageal adenocarcinoma and esophagogastric junction.

Esophageal Cancer: Tumor-Node-Metastasis Staging

Esophageal cancer is an uncommon malignancy that ranks sixth in terms of mortality worldwide. Squamous cell carcinoma is the predominant histologic subtype worldwide whereas adenocarcinoma represents the majority of cases in North America, Australia, and Europe. Esophageal cancer is staged using the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the International Union for Cancer Control TNM system and has separate classifications for the clinical, pathologic, and postneoadjuvant pathologic stage groups. The determination of clinical TNM is based on complementary imaging modalities, including esophagogastroduodenoscopy/endoscopic ultrasound; endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration; computed tomography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis; and fluorodeoxyglucose PET/computed tomography.

Advanced endoscopic imaging for detecting and guiding therapy of early neoplasias of the esophagus

Esophageal cancers, largely adenocarcinoma in Western countries and squamous cell cancer in Asia, present a significant burden of disease and remain one of the most lethal of cancers. Key to improving survival is the development and adoption of new imaging modalities to identify early neoplastic lesions, which may be small, multifocal, subsurface, and difficult to detect by standard endoscopy. Such advanced imaging is particularly relevant with the emergence of ablative techniques that often require multiple endoscopic sessions and may be complicated by bleeding, pain, strictures, and recurrences. Assessing the specific location, depth of involvement, and features correlated with neoplastic progression or incomplete treatment may optimize treatments. While not comprehensive of all endoscopic imaging modalities, we review here some of the recent advances in endoscopic luminal imaging, particularly with surface contrast enhancement using virtual chromoendoscopy, highly magnified subsurface imaging with confocal endomicroscopy, optical coherence tomography, elastic scattering spectroscopy, angle-resolved low-coherence interferometry, and light scattering spectroscopy. While there is no single ideal imaging modality, various multimodal instruments are also being investigated. The future of combining computer-aided assessments, molecular markers, and improved imaging technologies to help localize and ablate early neoplastic lesions shed hope for improved disease outcome.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Therapeutic endoscopy is an emerging field within general surgery. This article explores the evidence for and usage of endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection throughout the gastrointestinal tract. We aim to educate surgeons and provide an understanding of these techniques. With education and appropriate training, the surgeon will gain confidence and hopefully adopt these tools into their daily practice.

Triaging advanced GI endoscopy procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic: consensus recommendations using the Delphi method

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is a lack of consensus on which GI endoscopic procedures should be performed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and which procedures could be safely deferred without having a significant impact on outcomes.

METHODS

We selected a panel of 14 expert endoscopists. We identified 41 common indications for advanced endoscopic procedures from the ASGE Appropriate Use of GI Endoscopy guidelines. Using a modified Delphi method, we first achieved consensus on the patient-important outcome for each procedural indication. Panelists prioritized consensus patient-important outcome when categorizing each indication into one of the following 3 procedural time periods: (1) time-sensitive emergent (schedule within 1 week), (2) time-sensitive urgent (schedule within 1 to 8 weeks), and (3) non-time sensitive (defer for >8 weeks and then reassess the timing). Three anonymous rounds of voting were allowed before attempts at consensus were abandoned.

RESULTS

All 14 invited experts agreed to participate in the study. The prespecified consensus threshold of 51% was achieved for assigning patient-important outcome(s) to each advanced endoscopy indication. The prespecified consensus threshold of 66.7% was achieved for 40 of 41 advanced endoscopy indications in stratifying them into 1 of 3 procedural time periods. For 12 of 41 indications, 100% consensus was achieved; for 20 of 41 indications, 75% to 99% consensus was achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

By using a Modified Delphi method that prioritized patient-important outcomes, we developed consensus recommendations on procedural timing for common indications for advanced endoscopy. These recommendations and the structured decision framework provided by our study can inform decision making as endoscopy services are reopened.

Radiofrequency Ablation for Early Superficial Flat Esophageal Squamous Cell Neoplasia: A Comprehensive Review

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma comprises the majority of esophageal carcinoma in the Eastern Asia. The need of early detection of precancerous neoplastic lesions and cancer has been necessitated due to the probability of progression to the advanced stage and its poor prognosis. In recent times, many endoscopic modalities have come into practice for early detection and treatment. Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been recommended as an efficient therapy in treating the dysplastic mucosa in Barrett's esophagus (BE). Its potential in reversing neoplastic lesions in squamous epithelium has been gradually explored. This article is aimed at reviewing the current evidence regarding the use of RFA on esophageal squamous cell neoplasia.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in early diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal tumors

Objective

To explore the value of gastrointestinal endoscopy in the early diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal tumors and lay a foundation for the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal tumors.

Methods

One hundred and eight patients with gastrointestinal tumors who were admitted to our hospital from August 2016 to April 2018 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into observation group and control group according to different diagnostic methods, 54 cases in each group. The control group was treated with traditional endoscopy (white light imaging) and traditional surgery, while the observation group underwent narrow band imaging (NBI) based on endoscopic examination and endoscopic mucosal resection. The image quality scores (morphological image, gastric pit image and capillary image), diagnostic accuracy, surgery related clinical indicators (operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, hospitalization days) and complications were observed and compared between the two groups.

Results

The morphological image, gastric pit image and capillary image scores of the observation group were higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). The diagnostic accuracy rate of the observation group was 96.30%, which was significantly higher than 75.93% (P<0.05). The operation time and hospitalization days of the observation group were shorter than those of the control group, and the intraoperative bleeding volume of the observation group was less than that of the control group; the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The incidence of complications of the observation group was lower than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Gastrointestinal endoscopy can accurately identify the pathological changes of tumors in the early diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, improve the diagnostic accuracy rate, and guide the implementation of treatment measures to improve clinical indicators. Moreover the incidence of postoperative complications is low. It is worth clinical promotion.

Clinical Outcomes Based on the Timing of Appearance of Visible Lesions in Barrett's Esophagus During Endoscopic Eradication Therapy

BACKGROUND AND GOALS

Visible lesions (VLs) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) are seen in 70% to 90% of patients presenting for endoscopic eradication therapy (EET). It is not known if there are any differences in outcomes of patients with flat dysplasia versus patients with VL. Our aim was to assess outcomes of EET in BE patients with VL and BE patients with flat dysplasia.

STUDY

This is a single center study with data drawn from a prospective registry of patients referred for EET of BE between 2011 and 2015. Demographic data, endoscopic findings, histologic findings, and response to EET were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 264 patients of which 34 had flat dysplasia, 180 had VL before initiating EET (prevalent lesions) and 50 who developed VL during EET (incident lesions). Compared with patients with flat dysplasia, patients with VL had longer segments of BE (5 vs. 4 cm, P=0.002) and greater prevalence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) (63.6% vs. 29.4%, P<0.001). Incident lesions are less likely to harbor HGD/EAC compared with prevalent lesions (28.1% vs. 61.8%, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in eradication of metaplasia/dysplasia between the groups. No progression or recurrences were observed in flat dysplasia group. In VL group, 14 patients progressed (prevalent VL=11, incident VL=3) and 15 had recurrences (prevalent VL=11, incident VL=4).

CONCLUSIONS

About 19% of BE patients developed VL during EET. There is higher prevalence of HGD/EAC in prevalent VL compared with incident VL. However, the outcomes did not differ.

Histopathologic discrepancies between endoscopic forceps biopsy and endoscopic resection specimens in superficial esophageal squamous neoplasms

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic forceps biopsy results that reflect the final pathologic results of an entire lesion are essential for making accurate diagnoses and appropriate therapeutic decisions for patients with superficial esophageal squamous neoplasms (SESNs). This study investigated the histopathologic discrepancies between endoscopic forceps biopsy and endoscopic resection specimens to elucidate the factors contributing to such discrepancies.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study involved 77 patients (84 lesions) who underwent endoscopic resections for SESNs, between January 2005 and August 2017, at the Pusan National University Hospital. The SESNs were classified as low-grade intraepithelial neoplasms (LGINs), high-grade intraepithelial neoplasms (HGINs), or squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs). Following slide reviews, the histopathologic concordance between endoscopic forceps biopsy and endoscopic resection specimens was assessed, in each case.

RESULTS

The histopathologic discrepancy rate between the endoscopic forceps biopsy and endoscopic resection specimens was 34.5% (29/84 lesions). Among the 29 diagnostically discordant lesions, upgrades and downgrades of the histopathologic diagnoses occurred for 27 and 2 lesions, respectively. The predominant discrepancies results in lesion upgrades from HGIN to SCC (n = 21) and from LGIN to SCC (n = 5). The two downgraded cases included one from SCC to HGIN and one from HGIN to LGIN. Multivariate analyses identified two factors that were significantly associated with the histopathologic discrepancies: upper esophageal location (odds ratio, 7.743; 95% confidence interval, 1.031-58.174; P = 0.047) and tumor area per biopsy ≥ 158.6 mm2 /biopsy (odds ratio, 5.933; 95% confidence interval, 1.051-44.483; P = 0.044).

CONCLUSION

Histopathologic discrepancies were observed between endoscopic forceps biopsy and endoscopic resection specimens in patients with SESNs. Tumor location and tumor area/biopsy were both significantly associated with the discrepancies.

High rate of over-staging of Barrett's neoplasia with endoscopic ultrasound: Systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to stage patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) with suspected neoplasia is controversial due to high rates of over-staging. However, this rate of over-staging has not been adequately investigated or quantified.

AIM

To determine the rate of over-staging related EUS in this population.

METHODS

Search included Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central ending on 9/30/2016. The primary effect-estimate of interest was the false positive rate of advanced disease on EUS at the tumor level (T1a vs. T1b). Secondary outcomes included false detection rate, false negative rate, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Study heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 and Cochrane's Q.

RESULTS

Of 1872 studies, 11 met our inclusion criteria totaling 895 patients. Based on random effects models, the pooled FPR for advanced disease was 9.1% ([6.5-12.5%], p<0.001). Tests of heterogeneity showed no significant heterogeneity for this outcome. The pooled false negative rate was 9.2% [95%CI: 4.7-17.3%], p<0.01. Overall, the pooled accuracy of EUS results in BE neoplasia patients was low at 74.6% [58.7-85.8%], p=0.004.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of EUS in BE patients with dysplasia and early neoplasia results in a large proportion of patients falsely over-staged and under-staged.

Endoscopic treatment of Barrett's esophagus: What can we learn from the Western perspective?

The incidence of Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia in Western countries has increased in the past several decades and, even in Eastern countries, it appears to be increasing. Endoscopic therapies are the first-line treatment for BE-related neoplasia; however, there is still no standardized treatment strategy. Most of the data have been published from Western countries where the ultimate goal of treatment is complete eradication of BE mucosa removing subtle synchronous lesions and preventing metachronous neoplasia. A multimodality approach that combines endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been widely accepted in the West. In contrast, the lack of access to RFA treatment in the East has meant that endoscopic resection is the only feasible option. There is a wide divergence in treatment strategies for BE-related neoplasia between the East and the West. It is very important to consider these basic differences in the context of the currently available evidence to date. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to review the recent literature and to provide an overview of the endoscopic treatment options for BE.

Endoscopic treatment for Barrett's oesophagus dysplasia and early cancer

Endoscopic treatment of early Barrett's oesophagus neoplasia is now proven to be a safe and effective alternative to oesophagectomy. An ideal candidate for endoscopic treatment should have dysplasia or carcinoma limited to the mucosa or superficial submucosa without lymphovascular invasion or poor differentiation. Two main types of endoscopic therapies are used: (1) endoscopic resection, which comprises of endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection for removal of visible lesions en bloc and (2) endoscopic ablation utilising argon plasma coagulation, radiofrequency ablation or, more recently, cryotherapy. Although endoscopic resection is the cornerstone for Barrett's endotherapy, ablative techniques are complementary in achieving complete eradication of the columnar epithelium and dysplasia.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Management of Patients with Barrett's Esophagus and Superficial Neoplasia

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a minimally invasive advanced imaging procedure using high-frequency sound waves to produce detailed images of the esophageal wall with fine-needle aspiration to biopsy adjacent lymph nodes. The role of EUS is well established in patients with locally advanced Barrett esophagus neoplasia. The utility of EUS in the evaluation of Barrett esophagus patients is controversial. This is a review of the evidence using EUS in BE patients. The assessment is that EUS may be a powerful tool in managing patients with BE neoplasia.

Endoscopic mucosal resection for high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinoma: a Canadian experience

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is increasingly being used as a first-line treatment for Barrett esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal adenocarcinoma (IMC). We reviewed our experience with endoscopic treatment of BE with HGD and IMC at our institution with respect to eradication rates, complications and long-term recurrence.

METHODS

We performed a single-centre retrospective review of all patients referred between October 2010 and August 2014 for EMR with dysplastic BE or IMC. We performed EMR using a cap-fitted endoscope, and the procedure was repeated every 3 months until eradication or progression of disease.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients were identified: 16 with dysplastic BE (14 HGD, 1 low-grade dysplasia, 1 intermediate dysplasia) and 12 with IMC. Complete eradication of HGD was achieved in 11 of 14 (79%) patients. Three of 12 (25%) patients initially referred with suspected IMC were found to have invasive adenocarcinoma on EMR. Eradication was successful in 8 of 9 (89%) patients with true IMC, with 1 patient progressing to salvage esophagectomy. Complications occurred in 2 of 28 (7%) patients; both had esophageal strictures managed with dilatation. Median duration of follow-up was 371 days.

CONCLUSION

Our experience supports the safety of EMR as a first-line treatment for patients with BE with dysplasia and IMC in early short-term follow-up.

8th edition AJCC/UICC staging of cancers of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction: application to clinical practice

The 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging of epithelial cancers of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) presents separate classifications for clinical (cTNM), pathologic (pTNM), and postneoadjuvant (ypTNM) stage groups. Histopathologic cell type markedly affects survival of clinically and pathologically staged patients, requiring separate groupings for each cell type, but ypTNM groupings are identical for both cell types. Clinical categories, typically obtained by imaging with minimal histologic information, are limited by resolution of each method. Strengths and shortcomings of clinical staging methods should be recognized. Complementary cytology or histopathology findings may augment imaging and aid initial treatment decision-making. However, prognostication using clinical stage groups remains coarse and inaccurate compared with pTNM. Pathologic staging is losing its relevance for advanced-stage cancer as neoadjuvant therapy replaces esophagectomy alone. However, it remains relevant for early-stage cancers and as a staging and survival reference point. Although pathologic stage could facilitate decision-making, its use to direct postoperative adjuvant therapy awaits more effective treatment. Prognostication using pathologic stage groups is the most refined of all classifications. Postneoadjuvant staging (ypTNM) is introduced by the AJCC but not adopted by the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC). Drivers of this addition include absence of equivalent pathologic (pTNM) categories for categories peculiar to the postneoadjuvant state (ypT0N0-3M0 and ypTisN0-3M0), dissimilar stage group compositions, and markedly different survival profiles. Thus, prognostication is specific for patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. The role of ypTNM classification in additional treatment decision-making is currently limited. Precision cancer care advances are necessary for this information to be clinically useful.