AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Endoscopic Eradication Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

Incidence and Prediction of Unrelated Mortality After Successful Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Follow-up (FU) strategies after endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for Barrett's neoplasia do not consider the risk of mortality from causes other than esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to evaluate this risk during long-term FU, and to assess whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) can predict mortality.

METHODS

We included all patients with successful EET from the nationwide Barrett registry in the Netherlands. Data were merged with National Statistics for accurate mortality data. We evaluated annual mortality rates (AMRs, per 1000 person-years) and standardized mortality ratio for other-cause mortality. Performance of the CCI was evaluated by discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

We included 1154 patients with a mean age of 64 years (±9). During median 59 months (p25-p75 37-91; total 6375 person-years), 154 patients (13%) died from other causes than EAC (AMR, 24.1; 95% CI, 20.5-28.2), most commonly non-EAC cancers (n = 58), cardiovascular (n = 31), or pulmonary diseases (n = 26). Four patients died from recurrent EAC (AMR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-1.4). Compared with the general Dutch population, mortality was significantly increased for patients in the lowest 3 age quartiles (ie, age <71 years). Validation of CCI in our population showed good discrimination (Concordance statistic, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84) and fair calibration.

CONCLUSION

The other-cause mortality risk after successful EET was more than 40 times higher (48; 95% CI, 15-99) than the risk of EAC-related mortality. Our findings reveal that younger post-EET patients exhibit a significantly reduced life expectancy when compared with the general population. Furthermore, they emphasize the strong predictive ability of CCI for long-term mortality after EET. This straightforward scoring system can inform decisions regarding personalized FU, including appropriate cessation timing. (NL7039).

Efficacy and Safety of Argon Plasma Coagulation for the Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background/Aims

Argon plasma coagulation (APC) is an alternate ablative method to radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE), and it is preferred due to its lower cost and widespread availability. The present meta-analysis aimed to analyze the safety and efficacy of APC for the management of BE.

Methods

A literature search from January 2000 to November 2022 was done for studies analyzing the outcome of APC in BE. The primary outcomes were clearance rate of intestinal metaplasia and adverse events (AE). Pooled event rates were expressed with summative statistics.

Results

A total of 38 studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled event rate for clearance rate of intestinal metaplasia with APC in BE was 86.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.5% to 90.2%), with high-power and hybrid APC having a higher rate compared to standard APC. The pooled incidence of AE with APC in BE was 22.5% (95% CI, 15.3% to 29.7%), without any significant difference between the subgroups, with self-limited chest pain being the commonest AE. The incidence of serious AE was only 0.4% (95% CI, 0.0% to 1.0%), while stricture development was seen only in 1.7% (95% CI, 0.9% to 2.6%) of cases. The pooled recurrence rate of BE was 16.1% (95% CI, 10.7% to 21.6%), with a significantly lower recurrence with high-power APC than standard APC.

Conclusions

High-power and hybrid APC seem to have an advantage over standard APC in terms of clearance rate and recurrence rate. Further studies are required to compare the efficacy and safety of hybrid APC with standard APC and radiofrequency ablation.

Comparison of interventions for Barrett's esophagus: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a precancerous condition that has the potential to develop into esophageal cancer (EC). Currently, there is a wide range of management options available for individuals at different pathological stages in Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, there is currently a lack of knowledge regarding their comparative efficacy. To address this gap, we conducted a network meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials to examine the comparative effectiveness of all regimens.

METHODS

Data extracted from eligible randomized controlled trials were utilized in a Bayesian network meta-analysis to examine the relative effectiveness of BE's treatment regimens and determine their ranking in terms of efficacy. The ranking probability for each regimen was assessed using the surfaces under cumulative ranking values. The outcomes under investigation were complete ablation of BE, neoplastic progression of BE, and complete eradication of dysplasia.

RESULTS

We identified twenty-three RCT studies with a total of 1675 participants, and ten different interventions. Regarding complete ablation of non-dysplastic BE, the comparative effectiveness ranking indicated that argon plasma coagulation (APC) was the most effective regimen, with the highest SUCRA value, while surveillance and PPI/H2RA were found to be the least efficacious regimens. For complete ablation of BE with low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or esophageal cancer, photodynamic therapy (PDT) had the highest SUCRA value of 94.1%, indicating it as the best regimen. Additionally, for complete eradication of dysplasia, SUCRA plots showed a trend in ranking PDT as the highest with a SUCRA value of 91.2%. Finally, for neoplastic progression, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and surgery were found to perform significantly better than surveillance. The risk of bias assessment revealed that 6 studies had an overall high risk of bias. However, meta-regression with risk of bias as a covariate did not indicate any influence on the model. In terms of the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis evaluation, a high level of confidence was found for all treatment comparisons.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic surveillance alone or PPI/H2RA alone may not be sufficient for managing BE, even in cases of non-dysplastic BE. However, APC has shown excellent efficacy in treating non-dysplastic BE. For cases of BE with low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or esophageal cancer, PDT may be the optimal intervention as it can induce regression of BE metaplasia and prevent future progression of BE to dysplasia and EC.

Clinical Outcomes After Endoscopic Management of Low-Risk and High-Risk T1a Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is standard of care for T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, data on outcomes in high-risk T1a EAC are limited. We assessed and compared outcomes after EET of low-risk and high-risk T1a EAC, including intraluminal EAC recurrence, extraesophageal metastases, and overall survival.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EET for T1a EAC at 3 referral Barrett's esophagus endotherapy units between 1996 and 2022 were included. Patients with submucosal invasion, positive deep margins, or metastases at initial diagnosis were excluded. High-risk T1a EAC was defined as T1a EAC with poor differentiation and/or lymphovascular invasion, with low-risk disease being defined without these features. All pathology was systematically assessed by expert gastrointestinal pathologists. Baseline and follow-up endoscopy and pathology data were abstracted. Time-to-event analyses were performed to compare outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-eight patients with T1a EAC were included (high risk, n = 45; low risk, n = 143) with a median age of 70 years, and 84% were men. Groups were comparable for age, sex, Barrett's esophagus length, lesion size, and EET technique. Rates of delayed extraesophageal metastases (11.1% vs 1.4%) were significantly higher in the high-risk group ( P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the rates of intraluminal EAC recurrence ( P = 0.79) and overall survival ( P = 0.73) between the 2 groups.

DISCUSSION

Patients with high-risk T1a EAC undergoing successful EET had a substantially higher rate of extraesophageal metastases compared with those with low-risk T1a EAC on long-term follow-up. These data should be factored into discussions with patients while selecting treatment approaches. Additional prospective data in this area are critical.

Treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with a history of bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

The relationship among obesity, bariatric surgery, and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is complex, given that some bariatric procedures are thought to be associated with increased incidence of reflux and Barrett's esophagus. Previous bariatric surgery may complicate the use of the stomach as a conduit for esophagectomy. In this study, we presented our experience with patients who developed EAC after bariatric surgery and described the challenges encountered and the techniques used.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of our institutional database to identify all patients at our institution who were treated for EAC after previously undergoing bariatric surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 19 patients underwent resection with curative intent for EAC after bariatric surgery, including 10 patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy. The median age at diagnosis of EAC was 63 years; patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy were younger (median age, 56 years). The median time from bariatric surgery to EAC was 7 years. Most patients had a body mass index (BMI) score of >30 kg/m2 at the time of diagnosis of EAC; approximately 40% had class III obesity (BMI score > 40 kg/m2). Six patients (32%) had known Barrett's esophagus before undergoing a reflux-increasing bariatric procedure. Sleeve gastrectomy patients underwent esophagectomy with gastric conduit, colonic interposition, or esophagojejunostomy. Only 1 patient had an anastomotic leak (after esophagojejunostomy).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopy should be required both before (for treatment selection) and after all bariatric surgical procedures. Resection of EAC after bariatric surgery requires a highly individualized approach but is safe and feasible.

[Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Early Mucosal Neoplasms in the Oesophagus]

Endoscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis of oesophageal cancer and its precursor lesions. Besides this, endoscopy treatment of these precursor lesions and early oesophageal cancer has been well evaluated and established. This includes dysplastic lesions associated with Barrett's oesophagus and early adenocarcinoma, as well as early squamous cell cancer of the oesophagus. The role of endoscopy for diagnosis and treatment of these lesions is summarised.

Durability of radiofrequency ablation for long-segment and ultralong-segment Barrett's esophagus over 10 years

BACKGROUND

Long-term durability data for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma in long-segment (LSBE) and ultralong-segment Barrett's esophagus (ULSBE) is lacking. This study aimed to determine 10-year cancer progression, eradication, and complication rates in LSBE and ULSBE patients treated with RFA.

METHODS

Single-surgeon prospective database of patients with LSBE (≥ 3 to < 8 cm) and ULSBE (≥ 8 cm) who underwent RFA (2001-2021) were retrospectively analyzed. Ten-year cancer progression calculated with Kaplan-Meier analysis. Eradication rates, including complete remission of dysplasia (CR-D) and intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM), and rates of recurrence and complications, compared between LSBE and ULSBE groups.

RESULTS

Ten years after starting treatment, the cancer rate was 14.3% in 56 patients. CR-D and CR-IM rates were 87.5% and 67.9%, respectively. Relapse rates from CR-D were 1.8% and 3.6% from CR-IM. Eradication rates for dysplasia in LSBE and ULSBE patients (90.6% versus 83.3%) and IM (71.9% versus 62.5%) were not significantly different. ULSBE patients required higher mean number of ablation sessions for IM eradication (4.7 versus 3.7, p = 0.032), while complication rates including strictures (4.2% versus 6.2%), perforation (0 versus 0), and bleeding (4.2% versus 3.1%), were similar between ULSBE and LSBE patients, respectively. On multivariate analysis, shorter Barrett's segment and baseline low-grade dysplasia were associated with increased likelihood for eradication of IM and dysplasia. A total number of ablation sessions or endoscopic resections ≥ 3 was associated with reduced likelihood for eradication.

CONCLUSION

RFA was durable in maintaining dysplasia and IM eradication in both LSBE and ULSBE over 10 years, and with low complication rates. IM eradication was more difficult to achieve in ULSBE. Late development of cancer occurred in 14.3%.

Curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma has been increasing rapidly in the Western world. A well-known risk factor for developing this type of tumour is reflux disease, which can cause metaplasia from the squamous cell mucosa to columnar epithelium (Barrett's Oesophagus) which can progress to dysplasia and eventually adenocarcinoma. With the rise of the incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, research on the best way to manage this disease is of great importance and has changed treatment modalities over the last decades. The gold standard for superficial adenocarcinoma has shifted from surgical to endoscopic management when certain criteria are met. This review will discuss the different curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Antireflux Surgery Versus Antireflux Medication and Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Antireflux treatment is recommended to reduce esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett's esophagus. Antireflux surgery (fundoplication) counteracts gastroesophageal reflux of all types of carcinogenic gastric content and reduces esophageal acid exposure to a greater extent than antireflux medication (eg, proton pump inhibitors). We examined the hypothesis that antireflux surgery prevents esophageal adenocarcinoma to a larger degree than antireflux medication in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

METHODS

This multinational and population-based cohort study included all patients with a diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus in any of the national patient registries in Denmark (2012-2020), Finland (1987-1996 and 2010-2020), Norway (2008-2020), or Sweden (2006-2020). Patients who underwent antireflux surgery were compared with nonoperated patients using antireflux medication. The risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma was calculated using multivariable Cox regression, providing hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs adjusted for age, sex, country, calendar year, and comorbidity.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 33,939 patients with Barrett's esophagus. Of these, 542 (1.6%) had undergone antireflux surgery. During up to 32 years of follow-up, the overall HR was not decreased in patients having undergone antireflux surgery compared with nonoperated patients using antireflux medication, but rather increased (adjusted HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.5). In addition, HRs did not decrease with longer follow-up, but instead increased for each follow-up category, from 1.8 (95% CI, 0.6-5.0) within 1-4 years of follow-up to 4.4 (95% CI, 1.4-13.5) after 10-32 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with Barrett's esophagus who undergo antireflux surgery do not seem to have a lower risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma than those using antireflux medication.

DEVELOPMENT OF ADENOCARCINOMA AFTER RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION OF BARRETT'S ESOPHAGUS ASSOCIATED TO FUNDOPLICATION AND SUPPRESSION-DUODENAL DIVERSION PROCEDURE: A LESSON TO BE LEARNED

Despite endoscopic eradication therapy being an effective and durable treatment for Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia, even after achieving initial successful eradication, these patients remain at risk of recurrence and require ongoing routine examinations. Failure of radiofrequency ablation and argon plasma coagulation is reported in 10-20% of cases.

The 2022 top 10 list of endoscopy topics in medical publishing: an annual review by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Editorial Board

Using a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2022 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals, the 10-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy composed a list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy during the study year. Each Editorial Board member was directed to consider 3 criteria in generating candidate lists-significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice-and subject matter consensus was facilitated by the Chair through electronic voting. The 10 identified areas collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic spheres: artificial intelligence, endoscopic submucosal dissection, Barrett's esophagus, interventional EUS, endoscopic resection techniques, pancreaticobiliary endoscopy, management of acute pancreatitis, endoscopic environmental sustainability, the NordICC trial, and spiral enteroscopy. Each board member was assigned a consensus topic area around which to summarize relevant important articles, thereby generating this précis of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2022.

Multi-focal dysplasia is associated with high recurrence rates after successful ablation of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) might recur after complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CEIM). We investigated  factors associated with recurrence of BE after successful Radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

METHODS

A longitudinal study of BE patients with dysplasia treated with RFA from 2014 to 2021 in two large referral centers. Recurrence was identified in histologic specimens. Factors associated with post-RFA recurrence were analyzed using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 728 patients with BE were identified, 118 had underwent RFA, and 113 had sufficient follow up time. Mean age was 63.7 (±11.7) years, 73.5% were males, 59.3% had long segment of BE, and 30.1% had multifocal dysplasia. During 340.8 patient-years of follow-up, 15 patients (13.3%) had recurrence of BE, which represent an incidence rate of 4.41% per patient-year. Incidence rate of recurrence with dysplasia was 1.17% per patient-year. Multifocal dysplasia, number of RFA sessions, and endoscopic resection before RFA were associated with risk of recurrence in univariate analysis. However, in cox regression analysis only multifocal dysplasia (HR 10.99; 95% CI 2.83-22.62, p = 0.001) was associated with post-RFA recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Total recurrence rates after CEIM are low, and multifocal dysplasia before the ablative therapy is significantly associated with BE recurrence after CEIM. Patients with multifocal dysplasia should be monitored rigorously after successful ablation.

Incidence of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma, Mortality, and Esophagectomy in Barrett's Esophagus Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Eradication Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is the preferred treatment for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia patients. However, the impact of EET on critical outcomes, outside of clinical trials and registry data, remains scarcely studied. We aimed to assess real-world practice patterns and clinical outcomes among BE patients undergoing EET.

METHODS

TriNetX is a large research network comprising linked inpatient and outpatient electronic-health record-derived data from over 80,000,000 patients. Patients with a diagnosis of BE from 2015 to 2020 were identified and included if they underwent EET during the study period. The primary outcome was the progression to EAC after index EET. Secondary outcomes included rate of esophagectomy, and all-cause mortality. All outcomes were stratified by baseline histology. The incidence of EAC and all-cause mortality were reported in person-years and adjusted for age and sex.

RESULTS

A total of 4114 patients were analyzed. Distribution of baseline histology was as follows: NDBE (11.8%), LGD (21.4%), HGD (26.4%), EAC (20.8%), and unspecified (19.6%). The total incidence of EAC after index EET was 6.01 per 1000 person-years (PY) for the entire cohort with the highest rate in HGD patients (12.9/1000 PY). The incidence of all-cause mortality was 13.23 per 1000 PY with the highest rates in EAC patients (25.1 per 1000 PY). Rates of esophagectomy were < 1% for all grades of dysplasia.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study provide "real-world" data on critical outcomes for BE patients undergoing EET, demonstrating a low risk of incident EAC, all-cause mortality, and need for esophagectomy.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2:  ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3:  ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4:  ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5:  ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6:  ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7:  ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8:  ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9:  ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B:  ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C:  ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D:  ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E:  ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11:  After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

Location and appearance of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus recurrence after endoscopic eradication therapy: no additional yield from random biopsy sampling neosquamous mucosa

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Surveillance after complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) is essential. Current recommendations are to sample visible lesions first, followed by random 4-quadrant biopsy sampling of the original Barrett's esophagus (BE) length. To inform post-CRIM surveillance protocols, we aimed to identify the anatomic location, appearance, and histology of BE recurrences.

METHODS

We performed an analysis of 216 patients who achieved CRIM after endoscopic eradication therapy for dysplastic BE at a Barrett's Referral Unit between 2008 and 2021. The anatomic location, recurrence histology, and endoscopic appearance of dysplastic recurrences were evaluated.

RESULTS

After a median of 5.5 years (interquartile range, 2.9-7.2) of follow-up after CRIM, 57 patients (26.4%) developed nondysplastic BE (NDBE) recurrence and 18 patients (8.3%) developed dysplastic recurrence. From 8158 routine surveillance biopsy samplings of normal-appearing tubular esophageal neosquamous epithelium, the yield for recurrent NDBE or dysplasia was 0%. One hundred percent of dysplastic tubular esophageal recurrences were visible and in BE islands, whereas 77.8% of gastroesophageal junction dysplastic recurrences were nonvisible. Four distinct endoscopic features suspicious for recurrent advanced dysplasia or neoplasia were identified: buried or subsquamous BE, irregular mucosal pattern, loss of vascular pattern, and nodularity or depression.

CONCLUSIONS

The yield of routine surveillance biopsy sampling of normal-appearing tubular esophageal neosquamous epithelium was zero. BE islands with indistinct mucosal or loss of vascular pattern, nodularity or depression, and/or signs of buried BE should raise clinician suspicion for advanced dysplasia or neoplasia recurrence. We suggest a new surveillance biopsy sampling protocol with a focus on meticulous inspection, followed by targeted biopsy sampling of visible lesions and random 4-quadrant biopsy sampling of the gastroesophageal junction.

Disparities and access to thoracic surgeons among esophagectomy patients in the United States

Esophagectomy is a complex operation with significant morbidity and mortality. Previous studies have shown that sub-specialization is associated with improved esophagectomy outcomes. We hypothesized that disparities would exist among esophagectomy patients regarding access to thoracic surgeons based on demographic, geographic, and hospital factors. The Premier Healthcare Database was used to identify adult inpatients receiving esophagectomy for esophageal and gastric cardia cancer, Barrett's esophagus, and achalasia from 2015 to 2019 using ICD-10 codes. Patients were categorized as receiving their esophagectomy from a thoracic versus non-thoracic provider. Survey methodology was used to correct for sampling error. Backwards selection from bivariable analysis was used in a survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression to determine predictors of esophagectomy provider specialization. During the study period, 960 patients met inclusion criteria representing an estimated population size of 3894 patients. Among them, 1696 (43.5%) were performed by a thoracic surgeon and 2199 (56.5%) were performed by non-thoracic providers. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with decreased likelihood of receiving care from a thoracic provider included Black (OR 0.41, p < 0.001), Other (OR 0.21, p < 0.001), and Unknown race (OR 0.22, p = 0.04), and uninsured patients (OR 0.53, p = 0.03). Urban hospital setting was associated with an increased likelihood of care by a thoracic provider (OR 4.43, p = 0.001). In this nationally representative study, Nonwhite race, rural hospital setting, and lower socioeconomic status were factors associated with decreased likelihood of esophagectomy patients receiving care from a thoracic surgeon. Efforts to address these disparities and provide appropriate access to thoracic surgeons is warranted.

Endoscopic anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and endoscopic anti-reflux ablation (ARMA) as a potential treatment for gastroesophageal reflux - preliminary report

<b><br>Introduction:</b> Gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) is one of the most common disorders of the alimentary tract. Apart from troublesome symptoms, untreated GERD can lead to Barrett's esophagus and, as a consequence, esophageal adenocarcinoma. As for now, the most common treatment of GERD is PPI pharmacotherapy. However, in a number of cases, this treatment is not sufficient or the patient does not tolerate PPI-group drugs. In such cases, interventional therapy is recommended. So far, laparoscopic fundoplication has been the only suggested option. Other, minimally invasive procedures such as Stretta, MUSE, TIFF, or EsophyX were not recommended due to the lack of clinical data. In 2014, Professor H.Inoue from the Digestive Diseases Center, Showa University in Japan reported on the first series of novel, endoscopic, anti-reflux procedures: anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA).</br> <b><br>Methods:</b> We conducted our prospective, single-center study in 30 patients (14 female, 16 male) with PPI-refractory GERD. All patients underwent FSSG and GERD-HRQL evaluation and GE junction pressure study prior, 6 weeks and 6 months after the procedures. After the procedure, all patients received PPI treatment for 4 weeks.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> We successfully completed the procedures in all 30 patients. The mean procedure time was 42 minutes. No complications occurred. In 86.67% (26) of our patients, we achieved total remission of GERD symptoms, FSSG scores < 6 and GERD-HRQL scores < 8.</br> <b><br>Conclusions:</b> The results of our study show that ARMS and ARMA are simple, safe, improve GERD-related symptoms, and restore the GE junction's anti-reflux capacity.</br>.