Quality of endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus

Diagnosing dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus still requires Seattle protocol biopsy in the era of modern video endoscopy: results from a tertiary centre Barrett's dysplasia database

Objectives: The role of random, four-quadrant biopsy (i.e. systematic biopsy) in Barrett's oesophagus surveillance has been questioned given its drawbacks and the emergence of high-resolution endoscopy and advanced imaging modalities. Our study aims to assess whether neoplastic pathology is typically diagnosed in routine clinical practice by random, four-quadrant or targeted biopsy whilst using high-resolution endoscopy.Methods: The Nottingham University Hospital Barrett's oesophagus dysplasia database was retrospectively analysed. Endoscopic and histopathologic data pertaining to the initial endoscopy in which pathology was diagnosed was extracted from the medical records. The most advanced histopathologic abnormality at initial diagnosis and within twelve months were noted. The corresponding endoscopic impression at initial diagnosis was used to group cases per type of biopsy - random, four-quadrant or targeted. Pearson's χ² test of independence was used to analyse the relationship between the type of biopsy and diagnosis, indication for endoscopy, endoscopist level and advanced techniques used.Results: Of the 222 patients involved in the study - a higher proportion were diagnosed through random, four-quadrant biopsy (72.97%) than targeted biopsy (27.03%). 90.91% of low-grade dysplasia, 71.43% of high-grade dysplasia and 50% of intramucosal adenocarcinoma cases were diagnosed by random, four-quadrant biopsy. Across all grades of clinicians, patients were typically diagnosed through random, four-quadrant biopsy. However, amongst specialist consultant endoscopists (n = 10) the proportion was equal.Conclusions: Our findings strongly emphasize the importance of random, four-quadrant biopsy in the detection of not only low-grade dysplasia, but also high-grade dysplasia and early invasive carcinoma as part of Barrett's oesophagus surveillance.

Adherence to clinical guidelines for Barrett's esophagus

Background and aim: Clinical guidelines recommend endoscopy surveillance at given intervals or endoscopic therapy for Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD). Whether these guidelines are followed in clinical practice is unknown and was assessed in this study. Methods: This nationwide Swedish cohort study included patients with Barrett's esophagus with histologically verified LGD or HGD from 50 centers in 2006-2013. These patients were followed up using nationwide registers. Adherence to clinical guidelines was explored. Eight potential risk factors for deviation from guidelines were assessed using multivariable logistic regression, providing adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). Results: Among 211 patients with Barrett's esophagus (mean age 67.0 years, standard deviation 9.7 years, 81% male), 71% had LGD and 29% had HGD. During median 3.9 years of follow-up, 84% underwent a follow-up endoscopy, 17% received endoscopic therapy and 8% underwent esophagectomy. The clinical management deviated from guidelines in 60% of all patients (69% in LGD and 39% in HGD), which was mainly due to under-surveillance (86%). Risk factors for deviation from guidelines were LGD compared to HGD (OR 3.4, 95%CI 1.7-6.8), longer Barrett's segment length (OR 2.0, 95%CI 1.0-3.9, comparing ≥3 cm with <3 cm), and treatment at gastroenterology compared to surgery departments (OR 2.3, 95%CI 1.2-4.4). Age, sex, calendar period and university hospital status were not associated with deviation from surveillance guidelines. Conclusions: Adherence to guidelines for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus is poor, particularly for LGD. Efforts to implement clinical guideline recommendations are needed.

Quality Indicators in Barrett's Esophagus: Time to Change the Status Quo

The push for high quality care in all fields of medicine highlights the importance of establishing and adhering to quality indicators.In response, several gastrointestinal societies have established quality indicators specific to Barrett's esophagus, which serve to createthresholds for performance while standardizing practice and guiding value-based care. Recent studies, however, have consistentlydemonstrated the lack of adherence to these quality indicators, particularly in surveillance (appropriate utilization of endoscopy andobtaining biopsies using the Seattle protocol) and endoscopic eradication therapy practices. These findings suggest that innovativeinterventions are needed to address these shortcomings in order to deliver high quality care to patients with Barrett's esophagus.