EMR for Barrett's esophagus-related superficial neoplasms offers better diagnostic reproducibility than mucosal biopsy

Barrett's Esophagus and Associated Dysplasia

Early detection of dysplasia and effective management are critical steps in halting neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). This review provides a contemporary overview of the BE-related dysplasia, its role in guiding surveillance and management, and discusses emerging diagnostic and therapeutic approaches that might further enhance patient management. Novel, noninvasive techniques for sampling and surveillance, adjunct biomarkers for risk assessment, and their limitations are also discussed.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common condition associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. BE is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma, a highly lethal cancer with an increasing incidence over the last 5 decades. These revised guidelines implement Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the definition and diagnosis of BE, screening for BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma, surveillance of patients with known BE, and the medical and endoscopic treatment of BE and its associated early neoplasia. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include a broadening of acceptable screening modalities for BE to include nonendoscopic methods, liberalized intervals for surveillance of short-segment BE, and volume criteria for endoscopic therapy centers for BE. We recommend endoscopic eradication therapy for patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia and those with BE and low-grade dysplasia. We propose structured surveillance intervals for patients with dysplastic BE after successful ablation based on the baseline degree of dysplasia. We could not make recommendations regarding chemoprevention or use of biomarkers in routine practice due to insufficient data.

Effect of endoscopic submucosal dissection on histologic diagnosis in Barrett's esophagus visible neoplasia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data are limited on the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as a potential diagnostic and staging tool in Barrett's esophagus (BE) neoplasia. We aimed to evaluate the frequency and factors associated with change of histologic diagnosis by ESD compared with pre-ESD histology.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients who underwent ESD for BE visible neoplasia. A change in histologic diagnosis was defined as "upstaged" or "downstaged" if the ESD specimen had a higher or lower degree, respectively, of dysplasia or neoplasia when compared with pre-ESD specimens.

RESULTS

Two hundred five patients (median age, 69 years; 81% men) with BE visible neoplasia underwent ESD from 2016 to 2021. Baseline histology was obtained using forceps (n = 182) or EMR (n = 23). ESD changed the histologic diagnosis in 55.1% of cases (113/205), of which 68.1% were upstaged and 31.9% downstaged. The frequency of change in diagnosis after ESD was similar whether baseline histology was obtained using forceps (55.5%) or EMR (52.2%) (P = .83). In aggregate, 23.9% of cases (49/205) were upstaged to invasive cancer on ESD histopathology. On multivariate analysis, lesions in the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (odds ratio, 2.1; 95 confidence interval, 1.1-3.9; P = .02) and prior radiofrequency ablation (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-5.5; P = .02) were predictors of change in histologic diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD led to a change of diagnosis in more than half of patients with BE visible neoplasia. Selective ESD can serve as a potential diagnostic and staging tool, particularly in those with suspected invasive disease. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02989818.).

Endoscopic features of buried Barrett's mucosa

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Buried Barrett's mucosa is defined as intestinal metaplasia that is "buried" under the normal-appearing squamous epithelium. This can occur in Barrett's esophagus with or without previous endoscopic therapy. Dysplasia and neoplasia within buried Barrett's mucosa have also been reported. However, endoscopic features of buried Barrett's mucosa have not been described. At our tertiary referral center for Barrett's esophagus, several endoscopic features have been observed in patients who were found to have buried Barrett's mucosa on histology. These features are squamous epithelium which is (1) darker pink on white-light and darker brown on narrow-band imaging and/or (2) has a slightly raised or nodular appearance. It was also observed that either of these 2 features is frequently seen adjacent to a Barrett's mucosa island. This study aimed to (1) evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of these endoscopic features, and (2) evaluate the frequency of endoscopically identifiable buried Barrett's mucosa in patients with dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, before and after endoscopic eradication therapy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively observed cohort of all cases of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus referred to St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne. Endoscopy documentation software and histopathology reports of esophageal biopsy and EMR specimens between March 2013 and March 2019 were searched for terms "buried" or "subsquamous" Barrett's mucosa. Endoscopic reports, images, and histopathology reports of suspected buried Barrett's mucosa were then reviewed to apply the endoscopic features and correlate with the histologic diagnosis.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 506 patients with dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, 33 (7%) patients (73% male, median age at referral 70.5 years) had buried Barrett's mucosa on histology. Twenty-seven (82%) patients had previous treatment for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus; radiofrequency in 2 (6%), EMR in 4 (12%), and both modalities in 21 (64%). Six (18%) had no previous treatment. Histologically confirmed buried Barrett's mucosa was suspected at endoscopy in 26 patients (79%). Endoscopic features were (1) darker pink or darker brown mucosa underneath squamous epithelium (24%), (2) raised areas underneath squamous mucosa (27%), and both features present concurrently (27%). These features were associated with adjacent islands of Barrett's esophagus in 48%. Forty-four cases of buried Barrett's mucosa were suspected endoscopically, and these were sampled by biopsy (50%) and EMR (50%). Buried Barrett's mucosa was confirmed in 26 cases, with a positive predictive value of endoscopic suspicion of 59%. Eighteen cases of endoscopically suspected buried Barrett's mucosa had no buried Barrett's mucosa on histology; inflammation or reflux was identified in 12 (67%) patients. Dysplasia was identified within buried Barrett's mucosa in 12 (36%) patients; 5 intramucosal adenocarcinoma, 1 high-grade dysplasia, and 6 low-grade dysplasia. Endoscopic features of buried Barrett's mucosa were observed in 11 of 12 cases harboring dysplasia or neoplasia, compared with 15 of 21 cases of buried Barrett's mucosa without dysplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis of prospectively observed patients with dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, buried Barrett's mucosa was identified in 7%, including treatment-naive patients. The proposed endoscopic features of buried Barrett's mucosa were seen in 79% of patients with histology confirmed disease. These endoscopic features may predict the presence of buried Barrett's mucosa, which may contain dysplasia or neoplasia. An overlap between the endoscopic features of inflammation, reflux, and buried Barrett's mucosa was observed. Future prospective studies are required to develop and validate endoscopic criteria for identifying buried Barrett's mucosa.

Best Practices in Surveillance for Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus is the precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma. The goals of endoscopic surveillance are to detect dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma in order to improve patient outcomes. Despite the ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of surveillance, all current gastrointestinal societies recommend surveillance at this time. Optimal surveillance technique includes adequate inspection time, evaluation using high-definition white light and chromoendoscopy, appropriate documentation of the metaplastic segment using the Prague C & M criteria as well as the Paris classification should lesions be found, utilization of the Seattle biopsy protocol, and endoscopic resection of visible lesions.

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.

Therapeutic options for early cancer of the esophagogastric junction

Early-stage (T1) esophagogastric junction cancer continues to represent 2-3% of all cases. Adenocarcinoma is the most frequent and important type, the main risk factors for which are gastroesophageal reflux and Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia. Patients with mucosal (T1a) or submucosal (T1b) involvement initially require a thorough digestive endoscopy, and narrow-band imaging can improve visualization. Endoscopic treatment of these lesions includes endoscopic mucosal resection, radiofrequency ablation and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Accurate staging is necessary in order to provide optimal treatment. The most precise staging technique in these cases is endoscopic ultrasound. The suspicion of deep invasion of the submucosa, presence of unfavorable anatomopathological characteristics or impossibility to perform endoscopic resection make it necessary to consider surgical resection.

Radiofrequency ablation compared with argon plasma coagulation after endoscopic resection of high-grade dysplasia or stage T1 adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus: a randomized pilot study (BRIDE)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection (ER) is safe and effective for Barrett's esophagus (BE) containing high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or mucosal adenocarcinoma (T1A). The risk of metachronous neoplasia is reduced by ablation of residual BE by using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or argon plasma coagulation (APC). These have not been compared directly. We aimed to recruit up to 100 patients with BE and HGD or T1A confirmed by ER over 1 year in 6 centers in a randomized pilot study.

METHODS

Randomization was 1:1 to RFA or APC (4 treatments allowed at 2-month intervals). Recruitment, retention, dysplasia clearance, clearance of benign BE, adverse events, healthcare costs, and quality of life by using EQ-5D, EORTC QLQ-C30, or OES18 were assessed up to the end of the trial at 12 months.

RESULTS

Of 171 patients screened, 76 were randomized to RFA (n = 36) or APC (n = 40). The mean age was 69.7 years, and 82% were male. BE was <5 cm (n = 27), 5 to 10 cm (n = 45), and >10 cm (n = 4). Sixty-five patients completed the trial. At 12 months, dysplasia clearance was RFA 79.4% and APC 83.8% (odds ratio [OR] 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-2.6); BE clearance was RFA 55.8%, and APC 48.3% (OR 1.4; 95% CI, 0.5-3.6). A total of 6.1% (RFA) and 13.3% (APC) had buried BE glands. Adverse events (including stricture rate after starting RFA 3/36 [8.3%] and APC 3/37 [8.1%]) and quality of life scores were similar, but RFA cost $27491 more per case than APC.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggests similar efficacy and safety but a cost difference favoring APC. A fully powered non-inferiority trial is appropriate to confirm these findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01733719.).

Endoscopic Eradication Therapy in Barrett's Esophagus

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET), the standard of care for treatment of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early neoplasia, consists of a combination of endoscopic resection and ablative modalities. Resection techniques primarily include endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection. Resection of nodular disease is generally followed by one of multiple ablative therapies among which radiofrequency ablation has the best evidence supporting safety and efficacy. These advanced endoscopic procedures require both experience and expertise in the cognitive and procedural aspects of EET. However, very few formal programs exist that teach endoscopists the necessary skills to perform EET in a safe, standardized, and efficacious manner. Case volume at both the endoscopist and center level has been shown to impact clinical outcomes based on limited data. As a result, some recent guidelines endorse case volume as a measure of competency. Quality indicators, which can be used as benchmarks for training and as part of pay for quality initiatives, have recently been derived for EET. However, quality metrics in EET have not been widely accepted, nor are they broadly used currently. While the efficacy of EET for BE is established, there is a need for application of quality metrics to both assure adequate training in these procedures, as well as to assess treatment outcomes. A standardized EET training curriculum during endoscopic training, with competency assessment of both new clinicians and endoscopists in practice has potential to improve care in EET.

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.

Probe confocal laser endomicroscopy in the therapeutic endoscopic management of Barrett's dysplasia

Background

Endoscopic management of Barrett’s esophagus (BE) depends on the histological stage of BE and includes the following: follow up, endotherapy with thermal ablation, and piecemeal or monobloc endoscopic resection (ER). We know that biopsies are unreliable in 20-75% of cases. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficiency of probe confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) in the diagnosis of the histological stage of BE, compared with the final histological results after ER.

Methods

This retrospective study was based on a prospective registry of patients referred for management of BE-associated dysplasia. The inclusion criteria were dysplasia associated with BE on pre-resection biopsy and endoscopic resection of the examined areas. CLE examinations (pCLEs) were performed using the Gastroflex^® probe (Maunakea company). ER was sufficient to ensure that the target area was resected. The following four potential diagnoses were considered: normal or inflammatory mucosa, metaplasia (BE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (HGD/EAC).

Results

The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the detection of HGD/EAC were 92.9%, 71.4% and 80% for pCLE, and 78.6%, 61.9%, and 68.6% for histological biopsy, respectively. The differences in favor of pCLE were not statistically significant (P=0.2); however, in 13 patients with irregularities of the mucosa without elevated or depressed lesions (2 HGD/EAC and 11 non-HGD/EAC), pCLE led to positive redirection of therapy in 70% (9/13) of cases.

Conclusion

In the absence of visible lesions, pCLE appears to lead to correct diagnoses and to aid real-time decisions regarding therapeutic management.

Diagnosis and Management of Low-Grade Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus: Expert Review From the Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association

The purpose of this clinical practice update expert review is to define the key principles in the diagnosis and management of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus patients. The best practices outlined in this review are based on relevant publications, including systematic reviews and expert opinion (when applicable). Practice Advice 1: The extent of Barrett's esophagus should be defined using a standardized grading system documenting the circumferential and maximal extent of the columnar lined esophagus (Prague classification) with a clear description of landmarks and visible lesions (nodularity, ulceration) when present. Practice Advice 2: Given the significant interobserver variability among pathologists, the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus with LGD should be confirmed by an expert gastrointestinal pathologist (defined as a pathologist with a special interest in Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia who is recognized as an expert in this field by his/her peers). Practice Advice 3: Expert pathologists should report audits of their diagnosed cases of LGD, such as the frequency of LGD diagnosed among surveillance patients and/or the difference in incidence of neoplastic progression among patients diagnosed with LGD vs nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Practice Advice 4: Patients in whom the diagnosis of LGD is downgraded to nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus should be managed as nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Practice Advice 5: In Barrett's esophagus patients with confirmed LGD (based on expert gastrointestinal pathology review), repeat upper endoscopy using high-definition/high-resolution white-light endoscopy should be performed under maximal acid suppression (twice daily dosing of proton pump inhibitor therapy) in 8-12 weeks. Practice Advice 6: Under ideal circumstances, surveillance biopsies should not be performed in the presence of active inflammation (erosive esophagitis, Los Angeles grade C and D). Pathologists should be informed if biopsies are obtained in the setting of erosive esophagitis and if pathology findings suggest LGD, or if no biopsies are obtained, surveillance biopsies should be repeated after the anti-reflux regimen has been further intensified. Practice Advice 7: Surveillance biopsies should be performed in a four-quadrant fashion every 1-2 cm with target biopsies obtained from visible lesions taken first. Practice Advice 8: Patients with a confirmed histologic diagnosis of LGD should be referred to an endoscopist with expertise in managing Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia practicing at centers equipped with high-definition endoscopy and capable of performing endoscopic resection and ablation. Practice Advice 9: Endoscopic resection should be performed in Barrett's esophagus patients with LGD with endoscopically visible abnormalities (no matter how subtle) in order to accurately assess the grade of dysplasia. Practice Advice 10: In patients with confirmed Barrett's esophagus with LGD by expert GI pathology review that persists on a second endoscopy, despite intensification of acid-suppressive therapy, risks and benefits of management options of endoscopic eradication therapy (specifically adverse events associated with endoscopic resection and ablation), and ongoing surveillance should be discussed and documented. Practice Advice 11: Endoscopic eradication therapy should be considered in patients with confirmed and persistent LGD with the goal of achieving complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia. Practice Advice 12: Patients with LGD undergoing surveillance rather than endoscopic eradication therapy should undergo surveillance every 6 months times 2, then annually unless there is reversion to nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Biopsies should be obtained in 4-quadrants every 1-2 cm and of any visible lesions. Practice Advice 13: In patients with Barrett's esophagus-related LGD undergoing ablative therapy, radiofrequency ablation should be used. Practice Advice 14: Patients completing endoscopic eradication therapy should be enrolled in an endoscopic surveillance program. Patients who have achieved complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia should undergo surveillance every year for 2 years and then every 3 years thereafter to detect recurrent intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia. Patients who have not achieved complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia should undergo surveillance every 6 months for 1 year after the last endoscopy, then annually for 2 years, then every 3 years thereafter. Practice Advice 15: Following endoscopic eradication therapy, the biopsy protocol of obtaining biopsies in 4 quadrants every 2 cm throughout the length of the original Barrett's esophagus segment and any visible columnar mucosa is suggested. Practice Advice 16: Endoscopists performing endoscopic eradication therapy should report audits of their rates of complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia and adverse events in clinical practice.

Barrett's Esophagus: A Comprehensive and Contemporary Review for Pathologists

This review provides a summary of our current understanding of, and the controversies surrounding, the diagnosis, pathogenesis, histopathology, and molecular biology of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and associated neoplasia. BE is defined as columnar metaplasia of the esophagus. There is worldwide controversy regarding the diagnostic criteria of BE, mainly with regard to the requirement to histologically identify goblet cells in biopsies. Patients with BE are at increased risk for adenocarcinoma, which develops in a metaplasia-dysplasia-carcinoma sequence. Surveillance of patients with BE relies heavily on the presence and grade of dysplasia. However, there are significant pathologic limitations and diagnostic variability in evaluating dysplasia, particularly with regard to the more recently recognized unconventional variants. Identification of non-morphology-based biomarkers may help risk stratification of BE patients, and this is a subject of ongoing research. Because of recent achievements in endoscopic therapy, there has been a major shift in the treatment of BE patients with dysplasia or intramucosal cancer away from esophagectomy and toward endoscopic mucosal resection and ablation. The pathologic issues related to treatment and its complications are also discussed in this review article.

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

BACKGROUND

Patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal cancer (IMC) on endoscopic forceps biopsies are referred to endoscopic therapy even though forceps biopsies do not reflect the disease extent accurately. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are frequently used for staging prior to endoscopic therapy. Our aims were to evaluate: (1) if endoscopic forceps biopsies correlated with EMR histology in these patients; (2) the utility of EUS compared to EMR; and (3) if accuracy of EUS varied based on grade of differentiation of tumor.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of patients referred to endoscopic therapy of BE with HGD or early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) who underwent EMR from 2006 to 2011. Age, race, sex, length of Barrett's segment, hiatal hernia size, number of endoscopies and biopsy results and EUS findings were abstracted.

RESULTS

A total of 151 patients underwent EMR. In 50 % (75/151) of patients, EMR histology was consistent with endoscopic forceps biopsy findings. EMR resulted in change in diagnosis with upstaging in 21 % (32/151) and downstaging in 29 % (44/151). In patients with HGD on EMR, EUS staging was T0 in 74.1 % (23/31) but upstaged in 25.8 % (8/31). In patients with IMC on EMR, EUS findings were T1a in 23.6 % (9/38), upstaged in 18.4 % (7/38) and downstaged in 57.8 % (22/38). EUS accurately identified EMR histology in all submucosal cancers. Grade of differentiation was reported in 24 cancers on EMR histology. There was no correlation between grade and EUS staging.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is of limited utility in accurate staging of BE patients with HGD or early EAC. Endoscopic forceps biopsy correlated with EMR findings in only 50 % of patients. Irrespective of the endoscopic forceps biopsy results, all BE patients with visible lesions should be referred to EMR.

Barrett’s esophagus in 2016: From pathophysiology to treatment

Esophageal complications caused by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) include reflux esophagitis and Barrett’s esophagus (BE). BE is a premalignant condition with an increased risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The carcinogenic sequence may progress through several steps, from normal esophageal mucosa through BE to EAC. A recent advent of functional esophageal testing (particularly multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring) has helped to improve our knowledge about GERD pathophysiology, including its complications. Those findings (when properly confirmed) might help to predict BE neoplastic progression. Over the last few decades, the incidence of EAC has continued to rise in Western populations. However, only a minority of BE patients develop EAC, opening the debate regarding the cost-effectiveness of current screening/surveillance strategies. Thus, major efforts in clinical and research practice are focused on new methods for optimal risk assessment that can stratify BE patients at low or high risk of developing EAC, which should improve the cost effectiveness of screening/surveillance programs and consequently significantly affect health-care costs. Furthermore, the area of BE therapeutic management is rapidly evolving. Endoscopic eradication therapies have been shown to be effective, and new therapeutic options for BE and EAC have emerged. The aim of the present review article is to highlight the status of screening/surveillance programs and the current progress of BE therapy. Moreover, we discuss the recent introduction of novel esophageal pathophysiological exams that have improved the knowledge of the mechanisms linking GERD to BE.

Update on management of Barrett's esophagus

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common condition that develops as a consequence of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The significance of Barrett's metaplasia is that predisposes to cancer development. This article provides a current evidence-based review for the management of BE and related early neoplasia. Controversial issues that impact the management of patients with BE, including definition, screening, clinical aspects, diagnosis, surveillance, and management of dysplasia and early cancer have been assessed.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is among the most common conditions encountered by the gastroenterologist. In this document, the American College of Gastroenterology updates its guidance for the best practices in caring for these patients. These guidelines continue to endorse screening of high-risk patients for BE; however, routine screening is limited to men with reflux symptoms and multiple other risk factors. Acknowledging recent data on the low risk of malignant progression in patients with nondysplastic BE, endoscopic surveillance intervals are attenuated in this population; patients with nondysplastic BE should undergo endoscopic surveillance no more frequently than every 3-5 years. Neither routine use of biomarker panels nor advanced endoscopic imaging techniques (beyond high-definition endoscopy) is recommended at this time. Endoscopic ablative therapy is recommended for patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia, as well as T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma. Based on recent level 1 evidence, endoscopic ablative therapy is also recommended for patients with BE and low-grade dysplasia, although endoscopic surveillance continues to be an acceptable alternative. Given the relatively common recurrence of BE after ablation, we suggest postablation endoscopic surveillance intervals. Although many of the recommendations provided are based on weak evidence or expert opinion, this document provides a pragmatic framework for the care of the patient with BE.

Multidisciplinary treatment of T1a adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus: contemporary comparison of endoscopic and surgical treatment in physiologically fit patients

BACKGROUND

Previous reports comparing endoscopic therapy (ET) and surgical therapy (ST) have predominantly assessed patients with high-grade dysplasia. The study aim was to compare ET to ST in physiologically fit patients with cT1a adenocarcinoma (EAC).

METHODS

Review of two prospective databases yielded 100 patients presenting with clinical cT1a EAC between 2000 and 2013. Only physiologically fit patients who were candidates for either treatment were analyzed.

RESULTS

Presenting patient characteristics were similar between ET (n = 36) and ST groups (n = 49). Surgical patients were less likely to be staged with EMR (43 vs 100 %) and were associated with mass lesions >1 cm at EGD (p = 0.01), multifocal EAC (p = 0.03), and positive margins for EAC on EMR (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, only multifocal HGD was an independent factor for surgery. Following esophagectomy, R0 resection rates for Barrett's esophagus and cancer were 100 %. Incidence of surgery decreased over the study period from 85 to 25 %. All ET patients had EMR, and 28 patients underwent additional ablative therapies for Barrett's esophagus. Following ET, eradication rates of EAC, dysplasia, and BE were 92, 81, and 53 %, respectively. Morbidity rates were comparable between groups (ST 51 % vs ET 39 %, p = 0.31). In-hospital mortality rate was zero in each group. Recurrence rates in ST and ET group were 2 and 11 % (p = 0.08). In the ET group, two patients with endoluminal cancer recurrence after complete eradication underwent esophagectomy. Age-adjusted overall survival was comparable.

CONCLUSION

In high-volume esophageal centers, ST and ET provide equally safe and effective treatment for cT1a EAC in medically fit patients. While the results of this study provide a historical perspective and clearly demonstrate an evolution toward ET over time, the appropriate treatment modality is best selected in a multidisciplinary fashion with EMR providing the most accurate staging. In endoscopically treated patients, indefinite endoscopic follow-up required, however, standardized long-term follow-up protocols are needed.

Advances in the management of Barrett's esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has markedly increased in the United States over the last few decades. Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is the most significant known risk factor for this malignancy. Theoretically, screening and treating early BE should help prevent EAC but the exact incidence of BE and its progression to EAC is not entirely known and cost-effectiveness studies for Barrett’s screening are lacking. Over the last few years, there have been major advances in our understanding of the epidemiology, pathogenesis and endoscopic management of BE. These developments focus on early recognition of advanced histology and endoscopic treatment of high-grade dysplasia. Advanced resection techniques now enable us to endoscopically treat early esophageal cancer. In this review, we will discuss these recent advances in diagnosis and treatment of Barrett’s esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Endoscopic treatments for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: resection, ablation, what else?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic eradication therapy for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) comprises resection and mucosal ablation techniques. Over the years, these techniques have been tried with success, not only for dysplastic Barrett's epithelium but also for non-dysplastic Barrett's epithelium and early adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic resection is usually carried out for visible lesions, either as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), which is practiced widely in Western countries, or as endoscopic submucosal dissection, which is more popular in Japan and throughout Asia. Among ablative techniques are photodynamic therapy, cryotherapy, and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

METHODS

We reviewed the published evidence pertaining to endoscopic treatments of dysplastic BE, with emphasis on the various resection and ablative techniques, their safety, efficacy, durability of effect, and tolerability.

RESULTS

Both resection and ablation procedures performed endoscopically have been proved effective, and safe for treating dysplastic BE and early adenocarcinoma. Among the ablative techniques, RFA has shown to be more effective and safe, and is preferred for most cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic therapies have revolutionized the treatment of BE and have minimized the need for surgical intervention in many patients. Concomitant treatment of acid reflux with proton pump inhibitors and continuous surveillance are essential. Combination techniques such as EMR followed by RFA may be also considered in some cases.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Endoscopic Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus-related Neoplasia

A major paradigm shift has occurred in the management of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) and early esophageal carcinoma. Endoscopic therapy has now emerged as the standard of care for this disease entity. Endoscopic resection techniques like endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection combined with ablation techniques help achieve long-term curative success comparable with surgical outcomes, in this subgroup of patients. This article is an in-depth review of these endoscopic resection techniques, highlighting their role and value in the overall management of BE-related dysplasia and neoplasia.

Multiband mucosectomy for advanced dysplastic lesions in the upper digestive tract

Endoscopic resection (ER) is at present an accepted treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasia. ER provides similar efficacy to surgery; however, it is minimally invasive and less expensive. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is superior to biopsy for diagnosing advanced dysplasia and can change the diagnostic grade and the management. Several EMR techniques have been described that are alternatively used dependent upon the endoscopist personal experience, the anatomic conditions and the endoscopic appearance of the lesion to be resected. The literature suggests that EMR offers comparable outcomes to surgery for selected indications. EMR techniques using a cap fitted endoscope and EMR using a ligation device [multiband mucosectomy (MBM)] are the most frequently use. MBM technique does not require submucosal injection as with the endoscopic resection-cap technique, multiple resections can be performed with the same snare, pre-looping the endoscopic resection-snare in the ridge of the cap is not necessary, MBM does not require withdrawal of the endoscope between resections and up to six consecutive resections can be performed. This reduces the time and cost required for the procedure, while also reducing patient discomfort. Despite the increasing popularity of MBM, data on the safety and efficacy of this technique in upper gastrointestinal lesions with advanced dysplasia, defined as those lesions that have high-grade dysplasia or early cancer, is limited.

Clinical and histologic determinants of mortality for patients with Barrett's esophagus-related T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Superficial (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) commonly is treated by endoscopic resection, yet little is known about factors that predict outcomes of this approach. We assessed clinical and histologic variables associated with the overall survival times of patients with T1 EAC who received therapy.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis, we collected data from patients who underwent endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for T1 EAC (194 patients with T1a and 75 patients with T1b) at the Mayo Clinic, from 1995 through 2011. EMR specimens were reviewed systematically for depth of invasion, presence of lymphovascular invasion, grade of differentiation, and status of resection margins. Kaplan-Meier curves and proportional hazards regression models were used in statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics were similar between patients with T1a and T1b EAC. Overall survival at 5 years after EMR was 74.4% for patients with T1a (95% confidence interval [CI], 67.6%-81.8%) and 53.2% for patients with T1b EAC (95% CI, 40.3%-70.1%). Of surviving patients with T1a EAC, 94.1% remained free of cancer (95% CI, 89.8%-98.5%), and 94.7% of surviving patients with T1b EAC remained free of cancer (95% CI, 85.2%-100%). A multivariable model associated older age (per 10-year increment), evidence of lymphovascular invasion, and deep margin involvement with reduced overall survival in patients with T1 EAC.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic assessment of EMR specimens can help predict mortality and potentially guide treatment options for patients with T1 EAC.

Endoscopic therapy for Barrett's oesophagus

Barrett's oesophagus (BO) is thought to progress through the development of dysplasia (low grade and high grade) to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, a lethal cancer with poor survival. The overall goal of endoscopic therapy of BO is to eliminate metaplastic and dysplastic epithelium, to prevent and/or reduce the risk of progression to OAC. Endoscopic therapy techniques can be divided into two broad complementary techniques: tissue acquiring (endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection) and ablative. Endoscopic therapy has been established as safe and effective for the subjects with intra-mucosal cancer (IMC), high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and more recently in treating low-grade dysplasia (LGD). Challenges to endoscopic therapy are being recognized, such as incomplete response and recurrence. While eradication of intestinal metaplasia is the immediate goal of endoscopic therapy, surveillance must continue after complete elimination of intestinal metaplasia, to detect and treat recurrences.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Mucosal Biopsy versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in Barrett's Esophagus and Related Superficial Lesions

Background. Endoscopic surveillance for early detection of dysplastic or neoplastic changes in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) depends usually on biopsy. The diagnostic and therapeutic role of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in BE is rapidly growing. Objective. The aim of this study was to check the accuracy of biopsy for precise histopathologic diagnosis of dysplasia and neoplasia, compared to EMR in patients having BE and related superficial esophageal lesions. Methods. A total of 48 patients with previously diagnosed BE (36 men, 12 women, mean age 49.75 ± 13.3 years) underwent routine surveillance endoscopic examination. Biopsies were taken from superficial lesions, if present, and otherwise from BE segments. Then, EMR was performed within three weeks. Results. Biopsy based histopathologic diagnoses were nondysplastic BE (NDBE), 22 cases; low-grade dysplasia (LGD), 14 cases; high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 8 cases; intramucosal carcinoma (IMC), two cases; and invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC), two cases. EMR based diagnosis differed from biopsy based diagnosis (either upgrading or downgrading) in 20 cases (41.67%), (Kappa = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.170–0.69). Conclusions. Biopsy is not a satisfactory method for accurate diagnosis of dysplastic or neoplastic changes in BE patients with or without suspicious superficial lesions. EMR should therefore be the preferred diagnostic method in such patients.

Diagnosis and staging of superficial esophageal precursor based on pre-endoscopic resection system comparable to endoscopic resection

Background

Endoscopic treatments for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and the esophageal neoplasm are two types: endoscopic resection (ER) and ablation. Resection enables evaluation of the lesion in the ER specimens, while ablation cannot. We sought to establish a pre-ER evaluated system with a diagnostic and staging accuracy similar to ER for the development of ablation therapy.

Methods

In our study, we collected data pertaining to early esophageal cancer and esophageal neoplasm treated with ER, analyzed the pre- and post-ER data of the lesions and evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of pre-ER system compared with the gold standard.

Results

The diagnostic accuracy rate was 91% based on the pre-ER system compared with the gold standard, and 93% based on the ER diagnosis. The AUC of the pre-ER system was 0.964, while the ER examination was 0.971.

Conclusion

These results suggest that the accuracy of pre-ER system was comparable to ER. The pre-ER system enables prediction of histological diagnosis and stage of the lesions, and the choice of treatment for superficial esophageal neoplasm.

Pathologic discordance of differentiation between endoscopic biopsy and postoperative specimen in mucosal gastric adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

Tumor differentiation is a major determinant of endoscopic resection in mucosal gastric cancers, and the treatment decision is usually based on a preoperative endoscopic biopsy. However, in a proportion of patients, the pathologic assessment of differentiation differs between the endoscopic biopsy and postgastrectomy specimen. This discrepancy is important in that it may lead to an additional radical gastrectomy after endoscopic resection or unnecessary operation for patients who could have been treated with endoscopic resection. This study aimed to investigate the frequency of such cases and to identify risk factors for discordance in patients with mucosal gastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic characteristics of 1,326 patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for mucosal gastric cancer at Asan Medical Center from 2007 to 2011 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The overall discordance was 21.5 % (285 cases), and clinically significant discordant rate was 11.9 % (157 cases). Ninety-nine tumors (7.5 %) with differentiated histology on preoperative biopsy were found to be undifferentiated on postoperative pathology. Additionally, 58 patients (4.4 %) with undifferentiated histology on preoperative biopsy exhibited differentiated histology postoperatively. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, sex, tumor location, size, and gross pattern were associated with overall pathologic discordance. In patients with clinically significant discordance, only tumor location (cardia) and size ([2 cm) were independent factors for discordance.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering a high discordance rate of differentiation between biopsy samples and resected specimens in mucosal cancer in cardia, performing endoscopic resection for confirmative diagnosis of differentiation before total gastrectomy can be a good option.

Systematic review comparing radiofrequency ablation and complete endoscopic resection in treating dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: a critical assessment of histologic outcomes and adverse events

BACKGROUND

With recent advances in endoscopy, endoscopic techniques have surpassed esophagectomy in the treatment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of complete EMR and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of dysplastic BE.

DESIGN

Systematic review of literature.

PATIENTS

Diagnosis of BE with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal cancer.

INTERVENTION

Complete EMR or RFA.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia at the end of treatment and after >12 months' follow-up. Adverse event rates associated with treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Only 1 trial directly compared the 2 techniques; most studies were observational case series. Dysplasia was effectively eradicated at the end of treatment in 95% of patients after complete EMR and 92% after RFA. After a median follow-up of 23 months for complete EMR and 21 months for RFA, eradication of dysplasia was maintained in 95% of patients treated with complete EMR and 94% treated with RFA. Short-term adverse events were seen in 12% of patients treated with complete EMR but in only 2.5% of those treated with RFA. Esophageal strictures were adverse events in 38% of patients treated with complete EMR, compared with 4% of those treated with RFA. Progression to cancer appeared to be rare after treatment, although follow-up was short.

LIMITATIONS

Small studies, heterogeneous in design, with variable outcome measures. Also follow-up durations were short, limiting evaluation of long-term durability of both treatments.

CONCLUSION

RFA and complete EMR are equally effective in the short-term treatment of dysplastic BE, but adverse event rates are higher with complete EMR.

Consistency of a high-grade dysplasia diagnosis in Barrett's oesophagus: a Dutch nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Consistency of high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus is incompletely known and the clinical course may vary between patients.

AIMS

To evaluate the consistency of high-grade dysplasia diagnosis in a Dutch nationwide cohort and to identify predictors for (re-)detecting high-grade dysplasia or oesophageal adenocarcinoma when ≥ 1 follow-up evaluations after an initial high-grade dysplasia diagnosis were scored with a lower histological grade.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, all patients diagnosed with high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus between 1999 and 2008 in the Netherlands were selected using the nationwide histopathology registry. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors for (re-)detecting high-grade dysplasia or oesophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with ≥ 1 follow-up evaluations scored with a lower grade.

RESULTS

In total, 512 high-grade dysplasia patients were included, of whom 53% had ≥ 1 follow-up evaluations scored with a lower grade. The (re-)detection risk was increased when follow-up was performed in a university hospital and when endoscopic/surgical resection was performed and decreased with an increasing number of follow-up evaluations scored with a lower grade.

CONCLUSION

High-grade dysplasia diagnosis was inconsistent in more than half of patients. (Endoscopic) resection in an expert centre is recommended to (re-)detect high-grade dysplasia or oesophageal adenocarcinoma when an endoscopic follow-up protocol with biopsies repeatedly shows a lower histological grade.

Barrett esophagus: diagnostic challenges

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma and associated mortality has risen dramatically over the past several decades, and, thus, it is increasingly important to understand its pathogenesis and risk factors. Barrett esophagus is the established precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma that progresses through a metaplasia-dysplasia-carcinoma sequence. Its risk of transforming to carcinoma is not as high as previously reported and there appears to be a biological heterogeneity among patients with this disease. The overall prevalence of Barrett esophagus in the United States ranges from 1% to 25% and is closer to 5% in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Because of the frequency of Barrett esophagus and associated implications, it is important for the practicing pathologist to have a thorough understanding of this disease and its diagnostic pitfalls. In this review, we will discuss issues associated with the diagnosis of Barrett esophagus, including the definition of Barrett esophagus and its distinction from carditis with intestinal metaplasia. We will also discuss challenges in the grading of dysplasia and new variants of dysplasia, including crypt dysplasia and foveolar-type dysplasia. Finally, we will touch upon the evaluation of dysplasia in endoscopic mucosal resection specimens.

Lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer: evaluation of a novel method for measuring submucosal invasion and development of a nodal predicting index

After endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer (EGC), it is imperative to accurately determine whether follow-up surgery is indicated, since this technique is used as a first line of treatment. Herein, we developed a scoring system to indicate the risk of lymph node metastasis in submucosal EGC (smEGC), and present a novel method to measure depth of submucosal invasion. In our series, 15.9% of the smEGC presented with lymph node metastasis. A nodal prediction index, based on the variables extracted from the univariate analysis and defined as nodal prediction index = (2.128 × lymphovascular tumor emboli) + (1.083 × submucosal invasion width ≥ 0.75 cm) + (0.507 × submucosal invasion depth ≥ 1000 μm) + (0.515 × infiltrative growth pattern), yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.809 (P =.000, 95% CI = 0.713-0.096) in a training group, and showed comparable result in validation group (0.886, P =.000, 95% CI = 0.796-0.977). Depth of invasion was statistically higher in the metastatic group when measured from the lowest point of an imaginary line in continuity with the adjacent muscularis mucosa to the point of deepest tumor penetration, but not when using the classic measurement method. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the alternative measurement method was 0.652 (P =.013, 95% CI = 0.550-0.754) compared to 0.620 for the classic measurement method (P =.0480, 95% CI = 0.509-0.731). In deciding whether surgery is indicated after endoscopic submucosal dissection for smEGCs, we recommend to test our alternative method of measuring submucosal invasion and to evaluate our nodal prediction index as an adjunct tool.

Gastrointestinal dysplasia

The term dysplasia (intraepithelial neoplasia) is used to refer to neoplastic but non-invasive epithelium. Dysplasia in the gastrointestinal tract is considered a carcinoma precursor and a marker of high cancer risk for the site at which it is found. It is diagnosed by pathologists using a set of cytological and architectural features. There are many pitfalls in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal dysplasia. One reason for difficulty in dysplasia diagnosis is the significant heterogeneity in the appearances of each grade of dysplasia. In addition, the features that characterise dysplasia are only subtly different from those of regenerating epithelium, particularly at the low end of the spectrum, making this distinction difficult. For these reasons, and because of significant implications of this diagnosis for patient care, the interpretations of biopsies taken for dysplasia surveillance are considered challenging by most pathologists. In this article, we review definition, classification, and histological features and grading of gastrointestinal dysplasia with focus on Barrett's oesophagus (BE) related dysplasia, gastric epithelial dysplasia (GED) and dysplasia arising in the background of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We also discuss observer variability and the role of adjunctive markers in dysplasia diagnosis, and limitation with regard to surveillance of patients with BE and IBD due to sampling error.

Radiofrequency ablation in the management of Barrett's esophagus: present role and future perspective

Esophageal adenocarcinoma is the most rapidly increasing gastrointestinal cancer. Barrett's esophagus has been identified as a precancerous condition and major risk factor for esophageal cancer. Radiofrequency ablation has been shown to be a highly efficient in promoting remission of intestinal metaplasia. This technology has seen widespread clinical use since 2005. Radiofrequency ablation is common with all other ablative techniques; the concern that sound oncological principles are not being adhered to, that is, appropriate pathological staging, followed by appropriate definitive therapy. Endoscopic mucosal excision techniques are technically demanding; however, they are more attractive from an oncological perspective. Future research endeavors focusing on facilitation of large population screening, the identification of high risk phenotypes, endoscopic mucosal resection techniques will combat the esophageal adenocarcinoma epidemic.

Pathologic definition and number of lymphovascular emboli: impact on lymph node metastasis in endoscopically resected early gastric cancer

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted as an appropriate treatment modality for early gastric cancer (EGC). Accepted indications for ESD are mostly based on the risk of lymph node (LN) metastasis in EGC. The presence of lymphovascular emboli (LVEs) is the most important risk factor for predicting LN metastasis, but the criteria for diagnosing LVEs are inconsistent and controversial. Here, we defined LVE as the presence of tumor cells within a space according to the following criteria: (1) red cells or lymphocytes surrounding the tumor cells, (2) an endothelial cell lining, and (3) attachment to the vascular wall. We reviewed a series of 102 patients with EGC who underwent gastrectomy after ESD, evaluated the definition of LVE, counted the number of LVEs in ESD specimens, and validated the significance of the definition and number of LVEs with regard to the presence of LN metastasis in gastrectomy specimens using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Overall, 13 instances (12.7%) of LN metastasis were identified among 102 patients with EGC who underwent gastrectomy after ESD. The LN metastasis-positive group showed higher numbers of definite (4.46 ± 2.45 versus 0.19 ± 0.07), suspicious (3.15 ± 0.76 versus 0.62 ± 0.14), and probable (1.62 ± 0.43 versus 0.43 ± 0.10) LVEs in ESD specimens than the LN metastasis-negative group. In ROC analysis, the area under the ROC curve was 0.851 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.711-0.991) for definite LVEs, compared with 0.82 (95% CI, 0.698-0.960) for suspicious LVEs and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.549-0.891) for probable LVEs. We recommend the use of strict LVE criteria to predict LN metastasis and determine the need for surgical intervention after ESD.

Utility of baseline positron emission tomography with computed tomography for predicting endoscopic resectability and survival outcomes in patients with early esophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Positron emission tomography with computed tomography (PET/CT) has been used to detect metastasis in the diagnosis of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, the utility of PET/CT to assess primary tumor for endoscopic resectability and prognosis in early EAC remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective study to determine the association of PET/CT findings with histopathological tumor invasion depth and survival outcomes.

METHODS

EAC patients who underwent PET/CT followed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) were included. Pathology on EMR and survival outcomes from a prospectively maintained database was retrieved. Two radiologists independently reviewed the PET/CT using the following parameters: detection of malignancy, fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake intensity, FDG focality, FDG eccentricity, esophageal thickness, maximal standard uptake value (SUVmax), and SUVmax ratio (lesion/liver).

RESULTS

There were 72 eligible patients: 42 (58.3%) had T1a lesions, and 30 (41.7%) had ≥ T1b. Only SUVmax ratio was associated with tumor invasion depth (odds ratio=2.77, 95% confidence interval 1.26-7.73, P=0.0075). Using a cut-off of 1.48, the sensitivity and specificity of SUVmax ratio for identification of T1a lesions were 43.3% and 80.9%, respectively. Adjusting the SUVmax ratio to 2.14, 16.7% (5/30) of ≥ T1b patients were identified without any false-positive cases. Multivariate analysis showed SUVmax ratio, Charlson comorbidity index, and esophagectomy were independent predictors for survival.

CONCLUSIONS

SUVmax ratio (lesion/liver) is more accurate in predicting endoscopic resectability and mortality for EAC than other PET/CT parameters and appears promising as a useful adjunct to the current diagnostic work-up.

Barrett's esophagus in 2012: updates in pathogenesis, treatment, and surveillance

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the only established precursor lesion in the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and it increases the risk of cancer by 11-fold. It is regarded as a complication of gastroesophageal reflux disease. There is an ever-increasing body of knowledge on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of BE and its associated dysplasia. In this review, we summarize the latest advances in BE research and clinical practice in the past 2 years. It is critical to understand the molecular underpinnings of this disorder to comprehend the clinical outcomes of the disease. For clinical gastroenterologists, there is also continuous growth of endoscopic approaches which is daunting, and further improvements in the detection and treatment of BE and early EAC are anticipated. In the future, we may see the increased role of biomarkers, both molecular and imaging, in both diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for BE.

Advanced precancerous lesions in the lower oesophageal mucosa: high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinoma in Barrett's oesophagus

Adenocarcinoma developed in Barrett's oesophagus is a tumour with an increasing incidence and still a poor prognosis. The only marker that can be used for surveillance remains dysplasia (intraepithelial neoplasia), especially when it is high-grade, that precedes intramucosal carcinoma. New forms of dysplasia have been described in complement to the classical intestinal type (foveolar dysplasia, basal crypt dysplasia). High-grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinoma are diagnosed on biopsies taken during endoscopy. Standard endoscopy is now challenged by various techniques that represent recent major technical improvements (chromoendoscopy, virtual chromoendoscopy, optical frequency domain imaging, confocal laser endomicroscopy). In numerous cases, high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinoma can be treated by endoscopic procedures, allowing a precise histopathological diagnosis on the resected specimen (endoscopic mucosal resection, submucosal endoscopic dissection) or destroying the neoplastic tissue. Radiofrequency ablation is currently considered as the best available technique for treatment of flat high grade dysplasia and for eradication of residual Barrett's mucosa after focal endoscopic mucosal resection.

Endoscopic Therapy of Neoplasia Related to Barrett's Esophagus and Endoscopic Palliation of Esophageal Cancer

Background

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the most important identifiable risk factor for the progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

This article reviews the current endoscopic therapies for BE with high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal cancer and briefly discusses the endoscopic palliation of advanced esophageal cancer.

Results

The diagnosis of low-grade or high-grade dysplasia (HGD) is based on several cytologic criteria that suggest neoplastic transformation of the columnar epithelium. HGD and carcinoma in situ are regarded as equivalent. The presence of dysplasia, particularly HGD, is also a risk factor for synchronous and metachronous adenocarcinoma. Dysplasia is a marker of adenocarcinoma and also has been shown to be the preinvasive lesion. Esophagectomy has been the conventional treatment for T1 esophageal cancer and, although debated, is an appropriate option in some patients with HGD due to the presence of occult cancer in over one-third of patients.

Conclusions

Endoscopic ablative modalities (eg, photodynamic therapy and cryoablation) and endoscopic resection techniques (eg, endoscopic mucosal resection) have demonstrated promising results. The significant morbidity and mortality of esophagectomy makes endoscopic treatment an attractive potential option.

Endoscopic therapy for Barrett's esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma

Endoscopic therapy for Barrett's esophagus is feasible and likely to decrease the future risk of development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. The most commonly used therapy is radiofrequency ablation, which has been shown to produce reproducible superficial injury in the esophagus. Other thermal therapies include multipolar coagulation, argon plasma coagulation, and thermal laser therapy. The other end of the ablative spectrum includes cryotherapy, which involves freezing tissue to produce mucosal necrosis. Photodynamic therapy has been used to photochemically eliminate abnormal mucosa. Endoscopic therapy has been demonstrated to be effective in high-risk situations such as Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia.

Endoscopic resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection) for superficial Barrett's esophageal cancer

Recently developed endoscopic resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]/ endoscopic mucosal resection) has dramatically changed the therapeutic approach for Barrett's esophageal cancer. The rationale for endoscopic resection is that lesions confined to the mucosal layer have negligible risk for developing lymph node metastasis and can be successfully eradicated by endoscopic treatment as a curative treatment with minimal invasiveness. According to some reports that analyzed the rate of lymph-node involvement relative to the depth of mucosal or submucosal tumor infiltration, endoscopic resection is clearly indicated for intramucosal carcinoma and might be extended to lesions with invasion into the submucosa (<200 μm, sm1) because of the low risk for lymph node metastasis. Most Japanese experts recommend ESD for Barrett's esophageal cancer after accurate diagnosis of the margin of cancer using narrow band imaging with magnifying endoscopy because of its high curative rate. However, few studies have evaluated the long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection for Barrett's esophageal cancer in Japan. Further investigations should be conducted to establish endoscopic resection for Barrett's esophageal cancer.

Consensus statements for management of Barrett's dysplasia and early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, based on a Delphi process

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) is increasingly common among patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to provide consensus recommendations based on the medical literature that clinicians could use to manage patients with BE and low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or early-stage EA.

METHODS

We performed an international, multidisciplinary, systematic, evidence-based review of different management strategies for patients with BE and dysplasia or early-stage EA. We used a Delphi process to develop consensus statements. The results of literature searches were screened using a unique, interactive, Web-based data-sifting platform; we used 11,904 papers to inform the choice of statements selected. An a priori threshold of 80% agreement was used to establish consensus for each statement.

RESULTS

Eighty-one of the 91 statements achieved consensus despite generally low quality of evidence, including 8 clinical statements: (1) specimens from endoscopic resection are better than biopsies for staging lesions, (2) it is important to carefully map the size of the dysplastic areas, (3) patients that receive ablative or surgical therapy require endoscopic follow-up, (4) high-resolution endoscopy is necessary for accurate diagnosis, (5) endoscopic therapy for HGD is preferred to surveillance, (6) endoscopic therapy for HGD is preferred to surgery, (7) the combination of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is the most effective therapy, and (8) after endoscopic removal of lesions from patients with HGD, all areas of BE should be ablated.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a data-sifting platform and used the Delphi process to create evidence-based consensus statements for the management of patients with BE and early-stage EA. This approach identified important clinical features of the diseases and areas for future studies.