Surveillance in Barrett's Esophagus: Utility and Current Recommendations

Use of Appropriate Surveillance for Patients With Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Guidelines recommend that patients with nondysplastic BE (NDBE) undergo surveillance endoscopy every 3-5 years. We aimed to identify factors associated with surveillance endoscopy of patients with NDBE and identify trends in appropriate surveillance endoscopy of NDBE at a large tertiary care center.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from a Barrett's Esophagus Registry, identifying patients with NDBE who underwent endoscopy in 2002 or later. We identified patients with NDBE and collected data on length of BE segment, esophageal lesions, demographic features, medications, histology findings, comorbidities, development of EAC, and dates of follow-up endoscopies. We defined appropriate surveillance as 3-5 years between 2nd and 3rd endoscopies, over-utilizers as patients who had less than 3 years between their 2nd and 3rd endoscopies, under-utilizers as patients who had more than 5 years between their 2nd and 3rd endoscopies; and never-surveilled as patients who never received a 2nd endoscopy. The primary outcomes were effects of patient factors, year, and referring providers on appropriateness of surveillance intervals.

RESULTS

We identified 477 patients with NDBE. Only 15.9% had appropriate surveillance; 37.9% were over-utilizers 15.7% were under-utilizers and 30.4% were never surveilled. Patients were less likely to be over-surveilled if their primary care physician referred them for their 3rd endoscopy instead of a gastroenterologist (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95). Male patients or those with an increased number of comorbidities were more likely to be under-surveilled or never-surveilled, whereas patients with long BE segment were more likely to be over-surveilled.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of data from a registry of patients with BE, we found that less than 16% receive appropriate surveillance for NDBE. A primary care provider in the same health system as the endoscopy clinic reduced risk of over-surveillance. This could reflect better coordination of care between specialists and primary care providers.

The importance of a second opinion in the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus: a "real life" study

BACKGROUND

Barrett's esophagus is a precancerous lesion, and its identification with the early detection of dysplasia is of paramount importance to prevent adenocarcinoma onset. However, there is still debate on the correct pathological identification of Barrett's esophagus (and of associated dysplasia), and most studies have been conducted in an experimental setting.

AIMS

To assess previous uncertain diagnoses of Barrett's (with and without dysplasia) via a second opinion of an expert pathologist in a real life setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Histological sections of 32 suspected Barrett's patients from ten general Pathology units were centralized into one single unit in which an expert pathologist reviewed the slides blindly.

RESULTS

Overall, in 78% of cases there was diagnostic discordance; in particular, in 64% of cases the presence of low grade dysplasia was not confirmed. Of interest, 28% of cases with the original diagnosis were reclassified as non-Barrett's.

CONCLUSIONS

The pathological diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus, especially with regard to the presence of dysplasia, is still misinterpreted, particularly in the setting of general Pathology units. Thus, a second opinion from an experienced pathologist may help in the interpretation of the results and in starting appropriate follow-up programs.