Barrett's Esophagus: Emerging Knowledge and Management Strategies. Patholog Res Int. 2012;2012:814146. [PMID: 22701199 PMCID: PMC3369502 DOI: 10.1155/2012/814146]

Towards screening Barrett's oesophagus: current guidelines, imaging modalities and future developments

Barrett's oesophagus is the only known precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC). Although guidelines on the screening and surveillance exist in Barrett's oesophagus, the current strategies are inadequate. Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) is the gold standard method in screening for Barrett's oesophagus. This invasive method is expensive with associated risks negating its use as a current screening tool for Barrett's oesophagus. This review explores current definitions, epidemiology, biomarkers, surveillance, and screening in Barrett's oesophagus. Imaging modalities applicable to this condition are discussed, in addition to future developments. There is an urgent need for an alternative non-invasive method of screening and/or surveillance which could be highly beneficial towards reducing waiting times, alleviating patient fears and reducing future costs in current healthcare services. Vibrational spectroscopy has been shown to be promising in categorising Barrett's oesophagus through to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and OAC. These techniques need further validation through multicentre trials.

Wide-area transepithelial sampling in adjunct to forceps biopsy increases the absolute detection rates of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal dysplasia: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS) is a new technique that uses an abrasive brush to obtain samples from a larger surface area of the oesophagus. Studies have shown promising results that WATS in adjunct to forceps biopsy (FB) increases the detection rate of Barrett's oesophagus (BE) as well as oesophageal dysplasia (ED). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the detection rates of BE and ED between FB and WATS in adjunct to FB.

METHODS

A Literature search was done using electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane and CINAHL from inception to 26 April 2020. A meta-analysis comparing detection rates of WATS in adjunct to FB versus FB using the random-effects model was done using RevMan V.5.3.

RESULTS

Pooled data from 20 392 endoscopies across 11 studies showed an absolute increase in detection of 16% (95% CI 0.10% to 0.22%, p<0.00001). A relative increase of 1.62 was seen in detection rates of BE (95% CI 1.28 to 2.05, p<0.0001) when WATS was used with FB with the number needed to test (NNT) of 6.1 patients. For ED, a 2% absolute increase (95% CI 0.01 to 0.03, p=0.001) in additional diagnostic yield from WATS. A relative increase of 2.05 was seen in the detection rate of ED (95% CI 1.42 to 2.98, p=0.0001) yielding an NNT of 50 patients.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that WATS, as an adjunct to FB, improves both the absolute detection rate and relative detection rate of both BE and ED as compared to FB alone.

Attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform infrared spectral discrimination in human bodily fluids of oesophageal transformation to adenocarcinoma

Attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) of biofluids was used to detect oesophageal stages through to oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

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

The 4-quadrant forceps biopsy (FB) protocol for identifying Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal dysplasia (ED) suffers from poor sensitivity due to significant sampling error. We investigated the benefit of wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS) used adjunctively to the combination of random and targeted FB in the detection of ED, and as a secondary outcome, BE. In this multicenter prospective trial, community endoscopists at 21 sites utilized WATS as an adjunct to both targeted and random FB in patients undergoing BE screening and surveillance. Investigators alternated taking FB and WATS samples first. WATS specimens were analyzed at CDx Diagnostics (Suffern, NY) while FB samples were analyzed by each site's regular pathologists. Data were de-identified and then aggregated for analysis. Of 12,899 patients enrolled, FB identified 88 cases of ED, and WATS detected an additional 213 cases missed by FB. These 213 cases represented an absolute increase of 1.65%, raising the yield from 0.68% to 2.33%. Adding WATS to FB increased the overall detection of ED by 242% (95% CI: 191%-315%). Fewer than 61 patients needed to be tested with WATS to identify an additional case of ED. The combination of random and targeted FB identified 1,684 cases of BE, and WATS detected an additional 2,570 BE cases. The absolute incremental yield of adding WATS to FB is 19.9%, increasing the rate of detection from 13.1% to 33%. Adding WATS to FB increased the overall detection of BE by 153% (95% CI: 144-162%). The number needed to test with WATS in order to detect an additional case of BE was 5. Whether FB or WATS was done first did not impact the results. In this study, comprised of the largest series of patients evaluated with WATS, adjunctive use of the technique with targeted and random FB markedly improved the detection of both ED and BE. These results underscore the shortcomings of FB in detecting BE-associated neoplasia, which can potentially impact the management and clinical outcomes of these patients.

Improvement of atropine on esophagogastric junction observation during sedative esophagogastroduodenoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Although sedation esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is now widely used, previous research has reported that sedation during EGD exhibits a negative effect on esophagogastric junction (EGJ) exposure. Atropine might improve EGJ exposure, as noted in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to examine whether sedation had a negative effect on EGJ observation in the Chinese population, and whether atropine had some ability to act as an antidote to this unexpected secondary effect of sedation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, subjects were divided into the following three groups according to the methods of EGD examination: the non-sedation group, the propofol-fentanyl combined sedation group and the combined sedation with atropine administration group. The EGJ observation was assessed by a key photograph taken with the endoscopic camera 1 cm from the EGJ, which was rated on the following four-degree scale: excellent (score = 4), good (score = 3), fair (score = 2) and poor (score = 1).

RESULTS

The EGJ exposure was better in the sedation group administered atropine (score = 2.64±1.05) than in the sedation group (score = 1.99±1.08, P<0.05) but not as good as in the non-sedation group (score = 3.24±1.12, P<0.05). Reduced detection of EGJ diseases in the sedation group was also found, compared to the non-sedation group (P<0.05). Only the use of atropine (OR = 2.381, 95%CI: 1.297-4.371, P = 0.005) was independently associated with excellent observation of the EGJ during sedation EGD.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined propofol-fentanyl sedation reduces the extent of exposure of the EGJ during EGD and reduces the detection of EGJ diseases. The application of atropine in the sedation endoscopy examination helped to achieve better EGJ observation, but still cannot achieve an equal extent of exposure compared to non-sedation EGD.

Healthcare Cost of Over-Diagnosis of Low-Grade Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus

INTRODUCTION

Published reports have demonstrated that many Barrett's esophagus patients are over-diagnosed as low-grade dysplasia (BE-LGD). We performed an analysis of the surveillance and treatment costs associated with the over-diagnosis of BE-LGD.

METHODS

As the principal cost variables, we used endoscopic and histologic procedures performed during the recommended surveillance intervals for patients with BE-LGD, the national average Medicare reimbursement for the Current Procedural Terminology codes of the procedures performed, and a spreadsheet-based tool we created to determine the overall healthcare cost associated with the over-diagnosis of BE-LGD in the US population.

RESULTS

The average excess cost (range) for every patient in the US who is over-diagnosed with BE-LGD is estimated to be $5557 ($3115 to $8072). The principal contributors to the excess cost of over-diagnosis of BE-LGD in these patients are: endoscopy ($2626 to $4639), pathologist biopsy review ($275 to $2185), and esophagogastroduodenoscopy-guided endoscopic ablation ($214 to $1249).

CONCLUSIONS

The healthcare cost of over-diagnosis of BE-LGD is significant. To reduce the overall healthcare cost impact of over-diagnosis of BE-LGD, strict adherence to the recommendations of the American Gastroenterological Association, American College of Gastroenterology, and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy that pathology review of all BE biopsy specimens be performed by a gastrointestinal pathologist is warranted.

Expression of SOX9 and CDX2 in nongoblet columnar-lined esophagus predicts the detection of Barrett's esophagus during follow-up

The diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus in the United States requires both endoscopically evident columnar-lined esophagus and the presence of goblet cells by histology. Currently, there is no consensus on how patients with nongoblet columnar-lined esophagus should be followed. In this study, we investigated whether biomarkers can be used to predict the detection of goblet cells in follow-up biopsies. Patients with nongoblet columnar-lined esophagus were identified. In 13 of these cases, goblet cells were detected in subsequent follow-up endoscopic biopsies (Barrett's group). Additionally, 26 cases that remained negative for goblet cells in follow-up biopsies served as controls. Immunohistochemistry for CDX2, SOX9, BMP4, SHH, and MUC2 was performed on the initial biopsies and graded independently by at least two pathologists in a masked manner. CDX2 was positive in the nongoblet columnar epithelium of 7/13 cases in the Barrett's group and in 4/26 controls (sensitivity 54%, specificity of 85%, odds ratio (OR) 6.4). Strong and diffuse immunoreactivity for SOX9 was detected in 10/13 cases in the Barrett's group and in 1/26 controls (sensitivity 77%, specificity 96%, OR 83.3). Combining CDX2 and SOX9 as a panel increased sensitivity to 85%, although the specificity decreased to 85% (OR 30.3). SHH, BMP4, and MUC2 expression showed no significant difference between the Barrett's and control groups. In patients with nongoblet columnar-lined esophagus, SOX9 and CDX2 may be useful in identifying a subset of patients who have a higher risk of being diagnosed for Barrett's esophagus (developing goblet cells) and need closer follow-up.

Management strategies of Barrett's esophagus

Barrett’s esophagus is a condition resulting from chronic gastro-esophageal reflux disease with a documented risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Current strategies for improved survival in patients with Barrett's adenocarcinoma focus on detection of dysplasia. This can be obtained by screening programs in high-risk cohorts of patients and/or endoscopic biopsy surveillance of patients with known Barrett’s esophagus (BE). Several therapies have been developed in attempts to reverse BE and reduce cancer risk. Aggressive medical management of acid reflux, lifestyle modifications, antireflux surgery, and endoscopic treatments have been recommended for many patients with BE. Whether these interventions are cost-effective or reduce mortality from esophageal cancer remains controversial. Current treatment requires combinations of endoscopic mucosal resection techniques to eliminate visible lesions followed by ablation of residual metaplastic tissue. Esophagectomy is currently indicated in multifocal high-grade neoplasia or mucosal Barrett’s carcinoma which cannot be managed by endoscopic approach.