Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is common in the developing world with decreasing incidence in developed countries and carries significant morbidity and mortality. Major risk factors for ESCC development include significant use of alcohol and tobacco. Screening for ESCC can be recommended in high-risk populations living in highly endemic regions. The treatment of ESCC ranges from endoscopic resection therapy or surgery in localized disease to chemoradiotherapy in metastatic disease, and prognosis is directly related to the stage at diagnosis. New immunotherapies and molecular targeted therapies may improve the dismal survival outcomes in patients with metastatic ESCC.

Management of Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus and Early Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

While patients with Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia may benefit from endoscopic surveillance, those with low-grade dysplasia may be managed with either endoscopic surveillance or endoscopic eradication. Patients with Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and/or intramucosal adenocarcinoma will generally require endoscopic eradication therapy. The management of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma is predominantly endoscopic, with multiple effective methods available for the resection of raised neoplasia and ablation of flat neoplasia. High-dose proton-pump inhibitor therapy is advised during the treatment of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. After the endoscopic eradication of Barrett's esophagus and associated neoplasia, surveillance is required for the diagnosis and retreatment of recurrence or progression.

Barrett’s esophagus: Review of natural history and comparative efficacy of endoscopic and surgical therapies

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Progression to cancer typically occurs in a stepwise fashion through worsening dysplasia and ultimately, invasive neoplasia. Established EAC with deep involvement of the esophageal wall and/or metastatic disease is invariably associated with poor long-term survival rates. This guides the rationale of surveillance of Barrett’s in an attempt to treat lesions at an earlier, and potentially curative stage. The last two decades have seen a paradigm shift in management of Barrett’s with rapid expansion in the role of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for management of dysplastic and early neoplastic BE, and there have been substantial changes to international consensus guidelines for management of early BE based on evolving evidence. This review aims to assist the physician in the therapeutic decision-making process with patients by comprehensive review and summary of literature surrounding natural history of Barrett’s by histological stage, and the effectiveness of interventions in attenuating the risk posed by its natural history. Key findings were as follows. Non-dysplastic Barrett’s is associated with extremely low risk of progression, and interventions cannot be justified. The annual risk of cancer progression in low grade dysplasia is between 1%-3%; EET can be offered though evidence for its benefit remains confined to highly select settings. High-grade dysplasia progresses to cancer in 5%-10% per year; EET is similarly effective to and less morbid than surgery and should be routinely performed for this indication. Risk of nodal metastases in intramucosal cancer is 2%-4%, which is comparable to operative mortality rate, so EET is usually preferred. Submucosal cancer is associated with nodal metastases in 14%-41% hence surgery remains standard of care, except for select situations.

A Practical Approach to Refractory and Recurrent Barrett's Esophagus

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is recommended for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated neoplasia and is effective in achieving complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM). However, BE that is refractory to EET, defined as partial or no improvement in dysplasia after less than or equal to 3 ablative sessions, and the development of recurrence post-EET is not uncommon. Identification of refractory BE or recurrent intestinal metaplasia should prompt esophageal physiologic testing and modification of antireflux strategy, as appropriate. In patients who ultimately fail standard EET despite optimization of reflux control, salvage EET with alternate modalities may need to be considered.

Measuring Quality in Barrett's Esophagus: Time to Embrace Quality Indicators

Endoscopic eradication therapy is a safe and effective therapy that has revolutionized the management of patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia. Despite this, there remains significant heterogeneity in clinical practice with consequent variation in patient outcomes. The aim of this article was to align consensus statements based on the best available evidence and expert opinion from the United States and United Kingdom to develop robust and measurable quality indicators that help to ensure patients with BE-related neoplasia receive the highest possible quality of care uniformly.

Care of the Postablation Patient: Surveillance, Acid Suppression, and Treatment of Recurrence

Endoscopic eradication therapy is effective and durable for the treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE), with low rates of recurrence of dysplasia but significant rates of recurrence of intestinal metaplasia. Identified risk factors for recurrence include age and length of BE before treatment and may also include presence of a large hiatal hernia, higher grade of dysplasia before treatment, and history of smoking. Current guidelines for surveillance following ablation are limited, with recommendations based on low-quality evidence and expert opinion. New modalities including optical coherence tomography and wide-area tissue sampling with computer-assisted analysis show promise as adjunctive surveillance modalities.

Quality Indicators in Endoscopic Ablation for Barrett's Esophagus

OPINION STATEMENT

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a well-established premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC); a cancer that is associated with a poor 5-year survival rate. Several strategies have been explored in the context of reducing the burden of EAC. Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is considered the standard of care for the management of patients with BE with dysplasia and early neoplasia; a practice that has been endorsed by all gastroenterology societal guidelines. The effectiveness of EET has been demonstrated in multiple studies and contemporary management includes a combination of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of all visible lesions followed by eradication of the remaining BE using ablative techniques of which radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has the best evidence supporting effectiveness and safety. These techniques are being used increasingly at academic tertiary care centers and community practices. In this era of value-based health care, there is increased focus on the establishment, documentation, and reporting of quality indicators; indicators that are important to physicians, patients, and payers. The purpose of this review is to highlight the current status of quality indicators in EET for the management of patients with BE-related neoplasia and discuss the future steps required to ensure that these quality indicators are uniformly incorporated into practice.

Challenges with Endoscopic Therapy for Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus is the only identifiable premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) has revolutionized the management of Barrett's-related dysplasia and intramucosal cancer. The primary goal of EET is to prevent progression to invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma and ultimately improve survival rates. There are several challenges with EET that can be encountered before, during, or after the procedure that are important to understand to optimize the effectiveness and safety of EET and ultimately improve patient outcomes. This article focuses on the challenges with EET and discusses them under the categories of preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural challenges.