One-step circumferential endoscopic mucosal cap resection of Barrett's esophagus with early neoplasia

Endoscopic Management of Esophageal Cancer

Advances in technology and improved understanding of the pathobiology of esophageal cancer have allowed endoscopy to serve a growing role in the management of this disease. Precursor lesions can be detected using enhanced diagnostic modalities and eradicated with ablation therapy. Furthermore, evolution in endoscopic resection has provided larger specimens for improved diagnostic accuracy and offer potential for cure of early esophageal cancer. In patients with advanced esophageal cancer, endoluminal therapy can improve symptom burden and provide therapeutic options for complications such as leaks, perforations, and fistulas. The purpose of this review article is to highlight the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis, treatment, and palliation of esophageal cancer.

Benefit of radiofrequency ablation after widespread endoscopic resection of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus in daily practice

Background

High-grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal carcinoma (IMC) in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) are now well-established indications for endoscopic resection (ER). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can be combined with ER in case of flat or long-segment BE ablation. We report here our experience of complementary RFA after widespread ER of neoplastic BE in daily practice.

Method

We retrospectively reviewed data of 89 patients, treated between 2006 and 2013 by ER alone (group 1) or by ER combined with RFA (group 2).

Results

Fifty-five patients in group 1 (7F/48M, mean age 68 years) underwent widespread ER with eradication of residual non-dysplastic BE. Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and intestinal metaplasia (IM) was achieved in 32/32 (100%) and 48/55 (87.3%) patients, respectively. Thirty-four patients in group 2 (3F/31M, mean age 67 years) had a multimodal treatment strategy, with widespread ER followed by RFA. Mean Prague classification of BE in this group was significantly longer (C4.4M6.6 vs. C2.7M4.5, P<0.001). Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and non-dysplastic BE was confirmed in 26/27 (96.3%) and 20/34 (58.8%) patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups concerning adverse events (16.4% vs. 23.5%, P=0.58) or recurrence rate of HGD/IMC (9.1% vs. 14.7%, P=0.42). The mismatch rate between preoperative and final histological diagnosis was high in both groups, at 45.5% and 26.5%.

Conclusions

A combination of ER and RFA can treat significantly longer neoplastic BE than ER alone, with the same efficiency and safety. Widespread ER, in contrast, is the only method of obtaining a reliable histological diagnosis.

Management of esophageal strictures after endoscopic resection for early neoplasia

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection of extensive esophageal neoplastic lesions is associated with a high rate of esophageal stricture. Most studies have focused on the risk factors for post-endoscopic esophageal stricture, but data on the therapeutic management of these strictures are scarce. Our aim is to describe the management of esophageal strictures following endoscopic resection for early esophageal neoplasia.

METHODS

We included all patients with an endoscopic resection for early esophageal neoplasia followed by endoscopic dilatation at a tertiary referral center. We recorded the demographic, endoscopic, and histological characteristics, and the outcomes of the treatment of the strictures.

RESULTS

Between January 2010 and December 2019, we performed 166 endoscopic mucosal resections and 261 endoscopic submucosal dissections for early esophageal neoplasia, and 34 (8.0%) patients developed an esophageal stricture requiring endoscopic treatment. The indication for endoscopic resection was Barrett's neoplasia in 15/34 (44.1%) cases and squamous cell neoplasia (SCN) in 19/34 (55.9%) cases. The median [(interquartile range) (IQR)] number of endoscopic dilatations was 2.5 (2.0-4.0). Nine of 34 (26.5%) patients required only one dilatation, and 22/34 (65%) had complete dysphagia relief following three endoscopic treatment sessions. The median number of dilatations was significantly higher for SCN [3.0 (2-7); range 1-17; p = 0.02], and in the case of circumferential resection [4.0 (3.0-7.0); p = 0.03]. Endoscopic dilatation allowed a sustained dysphagia relief in 33/34 (97.0%) patients after a mean follow-up of 25.3 ± 22 months.

CONCLUSION

Refractory post-endoscopic esophageal stricture is a rare event. After a median of 2.5 endoscopic dilatations, 97.0% of patients were permanently relieved of dysphagia. Circumferential endoscopic esophageal resections should be considered when indicated.

Spatial distribution of dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus segments before and after endoscopic ablation therapy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is focal and difficult to locate. The aim of this meta-analysis was to understand the spatial distribution of dysplasia in BE before and after endoscopic ablation therapy.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed of multiple databases to July 2019. The location of dysplasia prior to ablation was determined using a clock-face orientation (right or left half of the esophagus). The location of the dysplasia post-ablation was classified as within the tubular esophagus or at the top of the gastric folds (TGF).

RESULTS

13 studies with 2234 patients were analyzed. Pooled analysis from six studies (819 lesions in 802 patients) showed that before ablation, dysplasia was more commonly located in the right half versus the left half (odds ratio [OR] 4.3; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.33 - 7.93; P < 0.001). Pooled analysis from seven studies showed that dysplasia after ablation recurred in 101 /1432 patients (7.05 %; 95 %CI 5.7 % - 8.4 %). Recurrence of dysplasia was located more commonly at the TGF (n = 68) than in the tubular esophagus (n = 34; OR 5.33; 95 %CI 1.75 - 16.21; P = 0.003). Of the esophageal lesions, 90 % (27 /30) were visible, whereas only 46 % (23 /50) of the recurrent dysplastic lesions at the TGF were visible (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Before ablation, dysplasia in BE is found more frequently in the right half of the esophagus versus the left. Post-ablation recurrence is more commonly found in the TGF and is non-visible, compared with the tubular esophagus, which is mainly visible.

The modern management of Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia: role of pathology

Modern management of Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia essentially focuses upon surveillance to detect early low-risk neoplastic lesions and offering organ-preserving advanced endoscopic therapies, while traditional surgical treatments of oesophagectomy and lymph node clearance with or without chemoradiation are preserved only for high-risk and advanced carcinomas. With this evolution towards figless invasive therapy, the choice of therapy hinges upon the pathological assessment for risk stratifying patients into those with low risk for nodal metastasis who can continue with less invasive endoscopic therapies and others with high risk for nodal metastasis for which surgery or other forms of treatment are indicated. Detection and confirmation of neoplasia in the first instance depends upon endoscopic and pathological assessment. Endoscopic examination and biopsy sampling should be performed according to the recommended protocols, and endoscopic biopsy interpretation should be performed applying standard criteria using appropriate ancillary studies by histopathologists experienced in the pathology of Barrett's disease. Endoscopic resections (ERs) are both diagnostic and curative and should be performed by clinicians who are skilled with advanced endoscopic techniques. Proper preparation and handling of ERs are essential to assess histological parameters that dictate the curative nature of the procedure. Those parameters are adequacy of resection and risk of lymph node metastasis. The risk of lymph node metastasis is determined by depth invasion and presence of poor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion. Those adenocarcinomas with invasion up to muscularis mucosae (pT1a) and those with superficial submucosal invasion (pT1b) up to 500 µ with no poor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion and negative margins may be considered cured by endoscopic resections.

Recent advances in understanding and preventing oesophageal cancer

Oesophageal cancer is a common cancer that continues to have a poor survival. This is largely in part due to its late diagnosis and early metastatic spread. Currently, screening is limited to patients with multiple risk factors via a relatively invasive technique. However, there is a large proportion of patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer who have not been screened. This has warranted the development of new screening techniques that could be implemented more widely and lead to earlier identification and subsequently improvements in survival rates. This article also explores progress in the surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus, a pre-malignant condition for the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. In recent years, advances in early endoscopic intervention have meant that more patients are considered at an earlier stage for potentially curative treatment.

Persistent intestinal metaplasia after endoscopic eradication therapy of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus increases the risk of dysplasia recurrence: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is the main treatment for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus and intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Although the goal of EET is to achieve complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM), treatment might achieve complete remission of dysplasia (CR-D) only, without achieving CRIM. Persistent intestinal metaplasia after eradication of dysplasia might carry a higher risk for progression into advanced neoplasia.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis after searching multiple databases to identify studies that evaluated dysplasia recurrence risk after successful eradication of neoplasia with EET. We calculated the pooled cumulative incidence of dysplasia and advanced neoplasia recurrence after CRIM and CR-D only and then compared the two using risk ratios.

RESULTS

Forty studies were included (4410 patients with total follow-up of 12,976 patient-years). A total of 4061 achieved CRIM and 349 achieved CR-D only. The cumulative incidence of CR-D only was 14% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10%-19%). The pooled cumulative incidence of any dysplasia recurrence after achieving CRIM was 5% (95% CI, 3%-7%) and 12% (95% CI, 4%-23%) after achieving CR-D only. Comparing dysplasia detection after achieving CR-D only with CRIM, there was a significantly higher risk for detection after CR-D (risk ratio [RR], 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7-4.6). The pooled cumulative incidence rate of high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) recurrence was 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) after achieving CRIM and 6% (95% CI, 0%-16%) after achieving CR-D only. Comparing HGD/EAC recurrence after achieving CR-D only with CRIM, there was a significantly higher risk for recurrence after CR-D (RR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.45-9). When excluding patients who underwent ablation for non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus only, these differences persisted with dysplasia recurrence after achieving CR-D only compared with CRIM showing a significantly higher risk for recurrence after CR-D (RR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.66-5).

CONCLUSIONS

CRIM was associated with a lower risk of dysplasia and advanced neoplasia recurrence compared with CR-D only. Achieving CRIM should remain the goal of EET in dysplastic Barrett's esophagus.

Roles of Steroids in Preventing Esophageal Stricture after Endoscopic Resection

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSES

Endoscopic resection has been worldwide recognized as a treatment strategy for early esophageal lesions. The occurrence of esophageal stricture after endoscopic resection will reduce the quality of life of patients. This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of steroids in the prevention of esophageal stricture after endoscopic resection and the influence of different steroid administration methods.

METHODS

In the relevant literature database, literature from 2008 to 2018 is retrieved by using preset keywords, the search results are carefully screened, and the conclusion of the literature is synthesized to form arguments and draw conclusions.

RESULTS

73 articles met our requirements. Oral steroid administration, not prophylactic endoscopic balloon dilation alone, was effective in preventing esophagostenosis after esophagoscopic treatment and reducing the number of repeated endoscopic balloon dilations even after extensive endoscopic resection. Local steroid injection is useful and economy for preventing esophageal stricture, even though it may raise the risk of perforation during dilations. A wider range of circumferential mucosal defects is an independent predictor for stricture formation for patents given preventive steroid injections after endoscopic submucosal dissection. For complete circular mucosal defect, the further researches are essential to investigate the role of local steroid injection. The effect of other methods such as steroid gel, intravenous infusion of steroid, and novel steroid filling methods require more confirmation.

CONCLUSIONS

Therefore, steroids play an irreplaceable role in preventing esophageal stricture after endoscopic resection. Oral and local injections of steroids are the two most acceptable methods and more prospective studies are needed to compare the effectiveness and safety of these two methods.

Role of endoscopic therapy in early esophageal cancer

Esophageal carcinoma is a highly lethal cancer associated with high morbidity and mortality. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and esophageal adenocarcinoma are the two distinct histological types. There has been significant progress in endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of early stages of cancer using resection and ablation techniques, as shown in several trials in the recent past. Earlier detection of esophageal cancer and advances in treatment modalities have lead to improvement in the 5-year survival from 5% to about 20% in the past decade. Endoscopic eradication therapy is the preferred modality of treatment in cancer limited to mucosal layer of the esophagus as there is very low risk of lymph node metastasis, leading to high cure rates, low risk of recurrence and with few adverse effects. The most common adverse events seen are strictures, bleeding and rarely perforation which can be endoscopically managed. In patients with recurrent advanced disease or invasive tumor, esophagectomy with lymph node dissection remains the mainstay of treatment. There is debate on post-endoscopic surveillance with some studies suggesting closer follow up with upper endoscopy every 6 mo for the first 1-2 years and then annually for the 3 years while others recommending the appropriate action only if symptoms or other abnormalities develop. Overall, the field of endoscopic therapy is still evolving and focus should be placed on careful patient selection using a multidisciplinary approach.

Higher Rate of Barrett's Detection in the First Year After Successful Endoscopic Therapy: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is highly effective in treating dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). Current surveillance intervals after complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) are based on expert opinion. We performed a meta-analysis to compare BE detection in the first year to the subsequent ones METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through 1 August 2017 for studies reporting IM and neoplasia detection after CRIM. Pooled incidence rate (IR) of IM detection was calculated for each year after CRIM. We compared IM, dysplasia, and high grade dysplasia (HGD)/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) detection in the first year after CRIM to the years after.

RESULTS

Twenty two studies were included involving 1973 patients with follow-up of 5176 patient-years. IM detection IR per patient-year in the 1st year was 12% (95% CI: 8-17%), in the 2nd year 7% (95% CI: 4-11%), and in the 3rd year 3% (95% CI: 1-7%). IM detection rate in the first year was significantly higher compared to the years after (relative risk (RR) 1.8 (95% CI: 1.29-2.49)). Dysplasia detection IR in the first year after achieving CRIM was 3% per patient-year (95% CI: 2-5%). Dysplasia detection IR after the first year was 1% (95% CI: 1-2%) and significantly higher in the first year compared to the years after (RR: 1.92 (95% CI: 1.32-2.8). HGD/EAC detection was 1 %/patient-year (95% CI: 0-2%) in the first year after CRIM compared to 0%/patient-year (95% CI: 0-1%) in subsequent years. HGD/EAC IR was higher in the first year (RR: 1.58 (95% CI: 0.94-2.65)).

CONCLUSION

Neoplasia detection after successful treatment of BE appears more common within the first year of surveillance. This appears to be due to incompletely treated prevalent rather than recurrent disease. More intensive surveillance in the first year following CRIM is warranted.

Efficacy, Durability, and Safety of Complete Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Barrett Esophagus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

GOALS

To report the rate of eradication and recurrence of both neoplasia and intestinal mucosa and the rate of adverse events for complete endoscopic resection (CER) of Barrett esophagus (BE).

BACKGROUND

There is limited composite data on the clinical efficacy of CER of BE with high-grade dysplasia or neoplasia.

STUDY

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies that reported the clinical outcome of patients with BE who underwent CER and had at least 15-month follow-up after the time of elimination of BE. Main outcome of interests were pooled estimated rates of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia and neoplasia, recurrence of intestinal metaplasia and neoplasia, and incidence of esophageal stricture, bleeding, and perforation.

RESULTS

We identified 8 studies reporting on 676 patients (high-grade dysplasia 54%) that met our criteria. Pooled estimated rates of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia and complete eradication of intestinal neoplasia were 85.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 79.4%-89.2%] and 96.6% (95% CI, 94.0%-98.1%), respectively, and rates of recurrence of intestinal metaplasia and recurrence of intestinal neoplasia were 15.7% (95% CI, 8.0%-28.4%) and 5.8% (95% CI, 3.9%-8.6%), respectively. Estimated incidences of adverse events were stricture 37.4 (95% CI, 24.4%-52.6%), bleeding 7.9% (95% CI, 4.4%-13.8%) and perforation 2.3% (95% CI, 1.3%-4.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

CER achieves an 85% complete eradication rate of BE with recurrent rate of neoplasia of 6%. Estimated rate of postprocedural stricture was 37.4%. On the basis of this high rate of adverse events and significant heterogeneity in the studies included, the present meta-analysis cannot endorse CER as sole therapy for BE.

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.

Approaches for stricture prevention after esophageal endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection of extensive esophageal lesions has become more common as endoscopic resection techniques and equipment have developed. However, extensive esophageal endoscopic resections can cause postoperative esophageal strictures, which have a negative impact on the quality of life of patients. We aimed to review current treatments and innovative approaches to prevent esophageal strictures after widespread endoscopic resection of esophageal lesions.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search from 2000 to 2016 using predetermined search terms to identify relevant articles and summarized their results as a narrative review.

RESULTS

A total of 21 original articles and case series were identified. A circumferential mucosal defect involving more than three fourths of the esophageal luminal circumference was the primary risk factor for developing an esophageal stricture after endoscopic resection. Oral and injectable steroid therapy demonstrated promise in preventing post-endoscopic submucosal dissection esophageal strictures, with both strategies significantly reducing the number of required endoscopic balloon dilations. More data are needed on prophylactic self-expandable metal stents, local botulinum toxin injection, and oral tranilast as a strategy to prevent post-endoscopic submucosal dissection esophageal strictures. Although preliminary studies of tissue-shielding resection sites with polyglycolic acid sheets and fibrin glue and autologous cell sheet transplantation have demonstrated promising results, additional larger validation studies are needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral and locally injected/administered steroids are first-line options for the prevention of esophageal strictures, but additional innovative solutions are being developed.

Recurrence of intestinal metaplasia and early neoplasia after endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

 Conflicting data exist with regard to recurrence rates of intestinal metaplasia (IM) and dysplasia after achieving complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients.

AIM

 (i) To determine the incidence of recurrent IM and dysplasia achieving CE-IM and (ii) to compare recurrence rates between treatment modalities [radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with or without endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) vs stepwise complete EMR (SRER)].

METHODS

 A systematic search was performed for studies reporting on outcomes and estimates of recurrence rates after achieving CE-IM. Pooled incidence [per 100-patient-years (PY)] and risk ratios with 95 %CI were obtained. Heterogeneity was measured using the I² statistic. Subgroup analyses, decided a priori, were performed to explore heterogeneity in results.

RESULTS

 A total of 39 studies were identified (25-RFA, 13-SRER, and 2 combined). The pooled incidence of any recurrence was 7.5 (95 %CI 6.1 - 9.0)/100 PY with a pooled incidence of IM recurrence rate of 4.8 (95 %CI 3.8 - 5.9)/100 PY, and dysplasia recurrence rate of 2.0 (95 %CI 1.5 - 2.5)/100 PY. Compared to the SRER group, the RFA group had significantly higher overall [8.6 (6.7 - 10.5)/100 PY vs. 5.1 (3.1 - 7)/100 PY, P  = 0.01] and IM recurrence rates [5.8 (4.3 - 7.3)/100 PY vs. 3.1 (1.7 - 4)/100 PY, P  < 0.01] with no difference in recurrence rates of dysplasia. Significant heterogeneity between studies was identified. The majority of recurrences were amenable to repeat endoscopic eradication therapy (EET).

CONCLUSION

 The results of this study demonstrate that the incidence rates of overall, IM, and dysplasia recurrence rates post-EET are not inconsiderable and reinforce the importance of close surveillance after achieving CE-IM.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of multimodal endoscopic eradication therapy in Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia: a systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Focal EMR followed by radiofrequency ablation (f-EMR + RFA) and stepwise or complete EMR (s-EMR) are established strategies for eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC)/intramucosal carcinoma (IMC). The objective of this study was to derive pooled rates of efficacy and safety of individual methods in a large cohort of patients with BE and to indirectly compare the 2 methods.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and major conference proceedings were searched. A systematic review and pooled analysis were carried out to determine the following outcomes in patients with BE undergoing either f-EMR + RFA or s-EMR: (1) complete eradication rates of neoplasia (CE-N) and intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM); (2) recurrence rates of cancer (EAC), dysplasia, and IM; (3) incidence rates of adverse events. Mixed logistic regression was performed as an exploratory analysis to examine differences in outcomes between the 2 methods.

RESULTS

Nine studies (774 patients) of f-EMR + RFA and 11 studies (751 patients) of s-EMR were included. Patients undergoing f-EMR + RFA had high BE eradication rates (CE-N, 93.4%; CE-IM, 73.1%), whereas strictures occurred in 10.2%, bleeding in 1.1%, and perforations in 0.2% of patients. Recurrence of EAC, dysplasia, and IM was 1.4%, 2.6%, and 16.1%, respectively, in this group. Patients undergoing s-EMR also showed high BE eradication rates (CE-N, 94.9%; CE-IM, 79.6%) but a higher rate of adverse events (strictures in 33.5%, bleeding in 7.5%, and perforation in 1.3%). Recurrence of EAC, dysplasia, and IM was 0.7%, 3.3%, and 12.1%, respectively, in the s-EMR group. Mixed logistic regression showed that patients undergoing s-EMR might be more likely to develop esophageal strictures (odds ratio [OR], 4.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.61-13.85; P = .005), perforation (OR, 7.00; 95% CI, 1.56-31.33; P = .01), and bleeding (OR, 6.88; 95% CI, 2.19-21.62; P = 0.001) compared with f-EMR + RFA.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HGD/EAC, f-EMR followed by RFA seems to be equally effective as and safer than s-EMR.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for early stage esophageal cancer

Mortality from esophageal cancer remains high despite advances in medical therapy. Although the incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus remains unchanged, the incidence of the esophageal adenocarcinoma has increased over time. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD and obesity are contributing factors to the development of Barrett's esophagus and subsequent development of adenocarcinoma. Early recognition of the disease can lead to resection of esophageal cancer prior to the development of lymphovascular invasion. Various modalities have been implemented to aid identification of precancerous lesions and early esophageal cancer. Chromoendoscopy, narrowband imaging and endoscopic ultrasound examination are typically used for evaluating early esophageal lesions. Recently, confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) and volumetric laser scanning were implemented with promising results. Endoscopic management of early esophageal cancer may be done using endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Both techniques allow resection of the mucosa (and possibly a portion of the submucosa) containing the early tumor without interruption of deeper layers. A submucosal injection creating a cushion coupled with snare resection or cap assisted mucosal suction followed by ligation and snare resection are the most common techniques of EMR. EMR can remove lesions less than 2 cm in size en bloc. Larger lesions may require resection in piecemeal fashion. This may limit assessment of the margins of the lesion and orienting the lesion's border. ESD offers en bloc dissection of the lesion regardless of its size. ESD is performed with specialized needle knives, which allow incision followed by careful dissection of the lesion within the submucosal layer. Tumor recurrence after ESD is rare but the technique is labor intensive and has an increased risk of perforation. Esophageal stenosis remains a concern after extensive EMR or ESD. Dilation with balloon or stent placement is usually sufficient to treat post-resection stenosis.

Risk of recurrence of Barrett's esophagus after successful endoscopic therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Previous estimates of incidence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) recurrence after achieving complete remission of IM (CRIM) through endoscopic therapy of Barrett's esophagus (BE) have varied widely. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies to estimate an accurate recurrence risk after CRIM.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of multiple literature databases through June 2015 to identify studies reporting long-term follow-up after achieving CRIM through endoscopic therapy. Pooled incidence rate (IR) of recurrent IM, dysplastic BE, and high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) per person-year of follow-up after CRIM was estimated. Factors associated with recurrence were also assessed.

RESULTS

We identified 41 studies that reported 795 cases of recurrence in 4443 patients over 10,427 patient-years of follow-up. This included 21 radiofrequency ablation studies that reported 603 cases of IM recurrence in 3186 patients over 5741 patient-years of follow-up. Pooled IRs of recurrent IM, dysplastic BE, and HGD/EAC after radiofrequency ablation were 9.5% (95% CI, 6.7-12.3), 2.0% (95% CI, 1.3-2.7), and 1.2% (95% CI, .8-1.6) per patient-year, respectively. When all endoscopic modalities were included, pooled IRs of recurrent IM, dysplastic BE, and HGD/EAC were 7.1% (95% CI, 5.6-8.6), 1.3% (95% CI, .8-1.7), and .8% (95% CI, .5-1.1) per patient-year, respectively. Substantial heterogeneity was noted. Increasing age and BE length were predictive of recurrence; 97% of recurrences were treated endoscopically.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of recurrence after achieving CRIM through endoscopic therapy was substantial. A small minority of recurrences were dysplastic BE and HGD/EAC. Hence, continued surveillance after CRIM is imperative. Additional studies with long-term follow-up are needed.

Systematic review: the prevention of oesophageal stricture after endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND

Extensive endoscopic resections for the treatment of early oesophageal neoplasia can result in fibro-inflammatory strictures that require repeated interventions, which significantly alter the patients' quality of life.

AIMS

To review current evidence about the prevention of oesophageal strictures following endoscopic resections.

METHODS

Systematic search of PubMed and Embase from inception to March 2015 using appropriate keywords. All original publications in English were included, and articles on the treatment of oesophageal stricture were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the 461 hits, 62 studies were included in the analysis. Among the wound-protective strategies, polyglycolic acid sheets showed the most convincing evidence with a 37.5% stricture rate and excellent safety. Regenerative medicine, using cell sheets of autologous keratinocytes, resulted in a 25% stricture rate, although with cost and availability concerns. Among anti-proliferative treatment modalities, steroid treatment, either endoscopically injected triamcinolone in the resection wound or orally administered prednisolone, proved effective with an overall stricture rate of 13.5%, with safety concerns regarding late oesophageal perforations and infectious morbidity. Among mechanical treatment options, poorly effective and high-risk preventive balloon dilation tend to be replaced by prophylactic covered stent, with 18-28% stricture rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Although oral or locally injected steroids are promising options, no currently available technique is sufficiently efficient and devoid of significant safety concerns to recommend its routine use for the prevention of strictures after extensive endoscopic resection. Improving our knowledge in the mechanisms of oesophageal wound healing will guide the development of novel methods for stricture prevention.