Adherence to the 2011 American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement for the diagnosis and management of Barrett's esophagus

Adherence to quality indicators and best practices in surveillance endoscopy of Barrett's esophagus: A video-based assessment

Background and study aims Adherence to quality indicators (QIs) and best practices (BPs) for endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) is low based on clinical documentation which is an inaccurate representation of events occurring during procedures. This study aimed to assess adherence to measurable QI and BP using video evaluation. Methods We performed a single center video-based retrospective review of surveillance endoscopies performed for BE ≥1 cm between March 1, 2018 and October 1, 2020. Adherence to QIs and BPs was assessed through video review and documentation. Videos were evaluated by five gastroenterologists. Interrater variability was determined using 10 videos before reviewing the remaining 128 videos. A generalized linear regression model was used to determine predictors of adherence to QIs and BPs. Results There were 138 endoscopies reviewed. Inspection with virtual chromoendoscopy (VC) occurred in 75 cases (54%) on video review with documentation in 50 of these cases (67%). Adherence to the Seattle protocol (SP) occurred in 74 cases (54%) on video review with documentation in 28 of these cases (38%). Use of VC or the SP was documented but not observed on video review in 16 (12%) and 30 (22%) cases, respectively. Length of BE was associated with increased use of the Prague classification (odds ratio [OR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.37) while years in practice was associated with a decreased likelihood of VC use (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.99). Conclusions This study validates prior data demonstrating poor adherence to QIs and BPs and highlights discrepancies between clinical documentation and events occurring during procedures.

Veterans with multiple risk factors for Barrett's esophagus are infrequently evaluated with upper endoscopy

Recent guidelines recommend screening for patients with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease who have three or more additional risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (BE). Failure to screen high-risk individuals represents a missed opportunity in esophageal adenocarcinoma prevention and early detection. We aimed to determine the frequency of upper endoscopy and prevalence of BE and esophageal cancer in a cohort of United States veterans who possessed four or more risk factors for BE. All patients at VA New York Harbor Healthcare System with at least four risk factors for BE between 2012 and 2017 were identified. Procedure records were reviewed for upper endoscopies performed between January 2012 and December 2019. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine risk factors associated with undergoing endoscopy and factors associated with BE and esophageal cancer. 4505 patients with at least four risk factors for BE were included. 828 patients (18.4%) underwent upper endoscopy, of which 42 (5.1%) were diagnosed with BE and 11 (1.3%) with esophageal cancer (10 adenocarcinoma; 1 squamous cell carcinoma). Among individuals who underwent upper endoscopy, risk factors associated with undergoing endoscopy included obesity (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.41-2.30; P < 0.001) and chronic reflux (OR, 3.86; 95% CI, 3.04-4.90; P < 0.001). There were no individual risk factors associated with BE or BE/esophageal cancer. In this retrospective analysis of patients with 4 or more risk factors for BE, fewer than one-fifth of patients underwent upper endoscopy, supporting the need for efforts aimed at improving BE screening rates.

High rate of missed Barrett's esophagus when screening with forceps biopsies

BACKGROUND

Screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) with endoscopy plus forceps biopsy (FB) has poor compliance with the recommended Seattle protocol and fails to sample large areas of mucosa. This statistical modeling study estimates, for the first time, the actual frequency of missed BE cases by FB.

METHODS

Published, calibrated models in the literature were combined to calculate the age-specific prevalence of BE in white males with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We started with estimates of the prevalence of BE and GERD, and applied the relative risk for BE in patients with GERD based on the literature. This created estimates of the true prevalence of BE in white males with GERD by decade of life. The proportion of BE missed was calculated as the difference between the prevalence and the proportion with a positive screen.

RESULTS

The prevalence of BE in white males with GERD was 8.9%, 12.1%, 15.3%, 18.7% and 22.0% for the third through eighth decades of life. Even after assuming no false positives, missed cases of BE were about 50% when estimated for patients of ages 50 or 60 years, and over 60% for ages of 30, 40 or 70 years. Sensitivity analysis was done for all variables in the model calculations. For ages 50 and 60 years, this resulted in values from 30.3 to 57.3% and 36.4 to 60.9%.

CONCLUSION

Screening for BE with endoscopy and FB misses approximately 50% of BE cases. More sensitive methods of BE detection or better adherence to the Seattle protocol are needed.

Clinical consequences of nonadherence to Barrett's esophagus surveillance recommendations: a Multicenter prospective cohort study

Half of Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies do not adhere to guideline recommendations. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we assessed the clinical consequences of nonadherence to recommended surveillance intervals and biopsy protocol. Data from BE surveillance patients were collected from endoscopy and pathology reports; questionnaires were distributed among endoscopists. We estimated the association between (non)adherence and (i) endoscopic curability of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), (ii) mortality, and (iii) misclassification of histological diagnosis according to a multistate hidden Markov model. Potential explanatory parameters (patient, facility, endoscopist variables) for nonadherence, related to clinical impact, were analyzed. In 726 BE patients, 3802 endoscopies were performed by 167 endoscopists. Adherence to surveillance interval was 16% for non-dysplastic (ND)BE, 55% for low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and 54% of endoscopies followed the Seattle protocol. There was no evidence to support the following statements: longer surveillance intervals or fewer biopsies than recommended affect endoscopic curability of EAC or cause-specific mortality (P > 0.20); insufficient biopsies affect the probability of NDBE (OR 1.0) or LGD (OR 2.3) being misclassified as high-grade dysplasia/EAC (P > 0.05). Better adherence was associated with older patients (OR 1.1), BE segments ≤ 2 cm (OR 8.3), visible abnormalities (OR 1.8, all P ≤ 0.05), endoscopists with a subspecialty (OR 3.2), and endoscopists who deemed histological diagnosis an adequate marker (OR 2.0). Clinical consequences of nonadherence to guidelines appeared to be limited with respect to endoscopic curability of EAC and mortality. This indicates that BE surveillance recommendations should be optimized to minimize the burden of endoscopies.

Patient Factors Associated With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Diagnostic Evaluation Strategies: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Real-World Evidence From a Large U.S. Medical Claims Database

Background and Aims

Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening is not highly utilized in the United States, and there are few data describing providers' approach to screening. To fill this gap and guide the implementation of future BE screening strategies, we studied evaluation practice patterns for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) by nongastroenterologists.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with chronic GERD using health claims data from the United States between 2005 and 2019. We used up to 5 years of data after the diagnosis of chronic GERD to determine patient factors associated with completion of a gastroenterology encounter. We also identified patient factors associated with whether the first gastroenterology encounter was a direct-access upper endoscopy or an office visit.

Results

We identified 484,023 patients diagnosed with chronic GERD by a nongastroenterology provider. The cumulative incidence of completing a gastroenterology encounter within 5 years was 38.7%. Gastrointestinal symptoms, such as dysphagia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.94-2.30), abdominal pain (aHR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.85-1.94), and melena (aHR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.65-1.82), were strongly associated with completion of a gastroenterology encounter. The patient factors strongly associated with direct-access upper endoscopy included dysphagia (aHR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.52-1.85), weight loss (aHR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.28-1.63), and melena (aHR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.28-1.56).

Conclusion

A total of 38.7% of patients with chronic GERD complete a gastroenterology encounter within 5 years of diagnosis, and gastrointestinal alarm symptoms are the most strongly associated factors for receiving gastroenterology care. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating primary care providers in the development of new BE screening programs.

Attending Training Courses on Barrett's Esophagus Improves Adherence to Guidelines: A Survey from the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Little is known on practice patterns of endoscopists for the management of Barrett's esophagus (BE) over the last decade.

AIMS

Our aim was to assess practice patterns of endoscopists for the diagnosis, surveillance and treatment of BE.

METHODS

All members of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) were invited to participate to a questionnaire-based survey. The questionnaire included questions on demographic and professional characteristics, and on diagnosis and management strategies for BE.

RESULTS

Of the 883 SIED members, 259 (31.1%) completed the questionnaire. Of these, 73% were males, 42.9% had > 50 years of age and 68.7% practiced in community hospitals. The majority (82.9%) of participants stated to use the Prague classification; however 34.5% did not use the top of gastric folds to identify the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ); only 51.4% used advanced endoscopy imaging routinely. Almost all respondents practiced endoscopic surveillance for non-dysplastic BE, but 43.7% performed eradication in selected cases and 30% practiced surveillance every 1-2 years. The majority of endoscopists managed low-grade dysplasia with surveillance (79.1%) and high-grade dysplasia with ablation (77.1%). Attending a training course on BE in the previous 5 years was significantly associated with the use of the Prague classification (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.9-12.1), the top of gastric folds as landmark for the GEJ (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.27-4.74) and advanced imaging endoscopic techniques (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.53-7.29).

CONCLUSIONS

Practice patterns for management of BE among endoscopists are variable. Attending training courses on BE improves adherence to guidelines.

A Pilot Study on Automatic Three-Dimensional Quantification of Barrett's Esophagus for Risk Stratification and Therapy Monitoring

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's epithelium measurement using widely accepted Prague C&M classification is highly operator dependent. We propose a novel methodology for measuring this risk score automatically. The method also enables quantification of the area of Barrett's epithelium (BEA) and islands, which was not possible before. Furthermore, it allows 3-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the esophageal surface, enabling interactive 3D visualization. We aimed to assess the accuracy of the proposed artificial intelligence system on both phantom and endoscopic patient data.

METHODS

Using advanced deep learning, a depth estimator network is used to predict endoscope camera distance from the gastric folds. By segmenting BEA and gastroesophageal junction and projecting them to the estimated mm distances, we measure C&M scores including the BEA. The derived endoscopy artificial intelligence system was tested on a purpose-built 3D printed esophagus phantom with varying BEAs and on 194 high-definition videos from 131 patients with C&M values scored by expert endoscopists.

RESULTS

Endoscopic phantom video data demonstrated a 97.2% accuracy with a marginal ± 0.9 mm average deviation for C&M and island measurements, while for BEA we achieved 98.4% accuracy with only ±0.4 cm2 average deviation compared with ground-truth. On patient data, the C&M measurements provided by our system concurred with expert scores with marginal overall relative error (mean difference) of 8% (3.6 mm) and 7% (2.8 mm) for C and M scores, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed methodology automatically extracts Prague C&M scores with high accuracy. Quantification and 3D reconstruction of the entire Barrett's area provides new opportunities for risk stratification and assessment of therapy response.

Endoscopic Screening for Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: Rationale, Candidates, and Challenges

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a cancer with increasing incidence and poor survival. Risk of EAC in patients with BE is higher compared with the general population. Endoscopic screening for BE is performed to identify patients earlier in the metaplasia-dysplasia-carcinoma sequence from BE to EAC to enable eradication therapy. BE screening should be considered in individuals with multiple risk factors for BE and EAC. Challenges to BE screening include the absence of a cost-effective, widely applicable minimally invasive screening tool, gastroesophageal reflux disease centric screening recommendations, and limitations of current endoscopic surveillance practice.

Association of Common Use Pharmaceuticals in Reducing Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A SEER-Medicare Analysis

Barrett's esophagus (BE), a recognized risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), is routinely managed with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) when symptomatic. Several lines of evidence suggest that PPIs may prevent malignant transformation. Chronic use of other common drugs, namely, statins nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and metformin, may also interfere with BE carcinogenesis, but confirmatory evidence is lacking. We identified 1,943 EAC cases and 19,430 controls (matched 10:1) between 2007 and 2013 that met our specified inclusion criteria in the SEER-Medicare database. Conditional logistic regression was used to generate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Wald χ² tests were used to assess significance of covariates. Compared with controls, EAC cases had a higher prevalence of BE (26.2%). Use of PPIs, NSAIDs, statins, or metformin reduced the odds of EAC (PPIs: 0.10; 95% CI, 0.09-0.12; NSAIDs: 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51-0.74; statins: 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13-0.17; metformin: 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.93). When stratified by BE, these associations persisted, though no association was found between NSAID use and EAC risk for participants with BE. Dual use of PPIs with NSAIDs or statins, and NSAID, statin, or metformin use alone also showed significant EAC risk reduction among all participants and those without BE. Use of PPIs alone and with NSAIDs, statins, or metformin was associated with reduced risk of EAC; however, a history of BE may diminish drug efficacy. These results indicate that common pharmacologic agents alone or in combination may decrease EAC development.Prevention Relevance: The use of common drugs, such as proton pump inhibitors, statins, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or metformin, may reduce one's risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma. These results suggest that repurposing agents often used for common chronic conditions may be a new strategy for cancer prevention efforts.

Endoscopists systematically undersample patients with long-segment Barrett's esophagus: an analysis of biopsy sampling practices from a quality improvement registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Guidelines recommend systematic biopsy sampling in Barrett's esophagus (BE) to reduce sampling error. Adherence to this biopsy sampling protocol has been suggested as a quality indicator; however, estimates of adherence are not available. Using a national registry, we assessed adherence and identified predictors of adherence to biopsy sampling protocols.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium Registry that included procedure indication, demographics, endoscopy, and pathology results. Patients with an indication of BE screening/surveillance or an endoscopic finding of BE were included. Adherence to the Seattle protocol was assessed by dividing BE length by number of pathology jars, with a ratio ≤2.0 with rounding down (lenient definition) or rounding up (stringent definition) for odd BE lengths considered adherent. Variables associated with adherence were assessed using generalized estimating equations to control for clustering within individual physicians.

RESULTS

Of 786,712 EGDs assessed, 58,709 (7.5%) EGDs in 53,541 patients met inclusion criteria (mean age, 61.3 years; 60.4% men; 90.2% white; mean BE length, 2.3 cm). When the lenient and stringent definitions for adherence were used, 87.8% and 82.7% of EGDs were adherent, respectively. Increasing BE length was the most significant predictor of nonadherence (odds ratio, .69; 95% confidence interval, .67-.71). Other predictors were increasing age, male gender, increasing American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and practice location. Performance of EGD by nongastroenterologist physicians was associated with nonadherence (odds ratio, .07; 95% confidence interval, .06-.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 20% of endoscopies performed in BE patients were not adherent to the Seattle protocol. As BE length increases, endoscopists become less compliant with odds of nonadherence increasing by 31% with every 1-cm increase in length.

Shorter time to achieve endoscopic eradication is not associated with improved long-term outcomes in Barrett's esophagus

Quality indicators have been proposed for endoscopic eradication therapy of Barrett's esophagus (BE). One such measure suggests that complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) should be achieved within 18 months of starting treatment. The aim of this study was to assess whether achievement of CE-IM within 18 months is associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of BE patients who underwent endoscopic eradication. Time to CE-IM was recorded and categorized as ≤ or > 18 months. The main outcome measures were recurrence of IM and of dysplasia after CE-IM, defined as a single endoscopy without endoscopic evidence of BE or histologic evidence of intestinal metaplasia. Recurrence was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. A total of 290 patients were included in the analyses. The baseline histology was high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal carcinoma in 74.2% of patients. CE-IM was achieved in 85.5% of patients, and 54.1% of the cohort achieved CE-IM within 18 months. Achieving CE-IM within 18 months was not associated with reduced risk of recurrence of IM or dysplasia in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. In this cohort, older age and increased BE length were associated with IM recurrence, and increased hiatal hernia size was associated with dysplasia recurrence. Compared to longer times, achieving CE-IM within 18 months was not associated with a reduced risk of recurrence of IM or dysplasia. Alternative evidence-based quality metrics for endoscopic eradication therapy should be identified.

Screening for Barrett's Esophagus: Balancing Clinical Value and Cost-effectiveness

In predisposed individuals with long standing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), esophageal squamous mucosa can transform into columnar mucosa with intestinal metaplasia, commonly called Barrett’s esophagus (BE). Barrett’s mucosa can develop dysplasia, which can be a precursor for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, most EAC cases are identified when esophageal symptoms develop, without prior BE or GERD diagnoses. While several gastrointestinal societies have published BE screening guidelines, these vary, and many recommendations are not based on high quality evidence. These guidelines are concordant in recommending targeted screening of predisposed individuals (eg, long standing GERD symptoms with age > 50 years, male sex, Caucasian race, obesity, and family history of BE or EAC), and against population based screening, or screening of GERD patients without risk factors. Targeted endoscopic screening programs provide earlier diagnosis of high grade dysplasia and EAC, and offer potential for endoscopic therapy, which can improve prognosis and outcome. On the other hand, endoscopic screening of the general population, unselected GERD patients, patients with significant comorbidities or patients with limited life expectancy is not cost-effective. New screening modalities, some of which do not require endoscopy, have the potential to reduce costs and expand access to screening for BE.

Adherence to quality indicators and surveillance guidelines in the management of Barrett's esophagus: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

 Adherence to quality indicators and surveillance guidelines in the management of Barrett's esophagus (BE) promotes high-quality, cost-effective care. The aims of this study were (1) to evaluate adherence to standardized classification (Prague Criteria) and systematic (four-quadrant) biopsy protocol, (2) to identify predictors of practice patterns, and (3) to assess adherence to surveillance guidelines for non-dysplastic BE (NDBE).

METHODS

 This was a single-center retrospective study of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) performed for BE (June 2008 to December 2015). Patient demographics, procedure characteristics, and histology results were obtained from the procedure report-generating database and chart review. Adherence to Prague Criteria and systematic biopsies was based on operative report documentation. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of practice patterns. Guideline adherent surveillance EGD was defined as those performed within 6 months of the recommended 3- to 5-year interval.

RESULTS

 In total, 397 patients (66.5 % male; mean age 60.1 ± 12.5 years) had an index EGD during the study period. Adherence to Prague Criteria and systematic biopsies was 27.4 % and 24.1 %, respectively. Endoscopists who performed therapeutic interventions for BE were more likely to use the Prague Criteria (OR: 3.16; 95 %CI: 1.47 - 6.82; P  < 0.01) than those who did not. Longer time in practice was positively associated with adherence to Prague Criteria (OR 1.07; 95 %CI: 1.02 - 1.12; P  < 0.01) but with a lower likelihood of performing systematic biopsies (OR 0.91; 95 %CI: 0.85 - 0.97; P  < 0.01). More than half (55.6 %) of patients with NDBE underwent surveillance EGD sooner (range 1 - 29 months) than the recommended interval.

CONCLUSION

 Adherence to quality indicators and surveillance guidelines in BE is low. Operator characteristics, including experience with endoscopic therapy for BE and time in practice predicted practice pattern. Future efforts are needed to reduce variability in practice and promote high-value care.

Adherence to Surveillance Guidelines in Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus

INTRODUCTION

Surveillance patterns in Barrett's esophagus (BE) are not well characterized. Guidelines published between 2002 and 2008 recommended surveillance esophagogastroduodenoscopy (sEGD) at 3-year intervals for nondysplastic BE (NDBE). We assessed guideline adherence in incident NDBE in a Veterans Affairs (VA)-based study.

METHODS

At a single VA center, we identified incident cases of biopsy-confirmed NDBE between January, 2006 and December, 2008. We excluded patients aged 76 years and above and those who developed BE-associated dysplasia or cancer during follow-up. All sEGDs through October, 2014 were documented. Our primary criteria classified cases as guideline adherent if a sEGD was performed within 6 months of each expected 3-year surveillance interval; in cases with ≥2 sEGDs, 1 sEGD >6 months, and ≤1 year outside an interval was allowed if the average interval was between 2.5 and 3.5 years. Comorbidity, primary care encounters, presence of long-segment BE (LSBE), endoscopist recommendations, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) were assessed.

RESULTS

We identified 110 patients (96.4% male, 93.6% white) with mean age 58.9±8.5 years at index EGD. Median follow-up was 6.7 years (range, 3.7 to 8.6). Thirty-three (30.0%) cases were guideline adherent; 77 (70.0%) cases were nonadherent, including 52 (47.3%) with irregular surveillance and 25 (22.7%) with no surveillance. Forty cases (14 adherent) had 1 sEGD, 36 (18 adherent) had 2, 8 (1 adherent) had 3, and 1 nonadherent case had 4. Adherent cases were significantly older (61.5 vs. 57.9 y, P=0.04), and tended to have more LSBE (33.3% vs. 20.8%, P=0.16). There were no differences between adherent and nonadherent cases in annual primary care encounters (72.7% vs. 66.2%, P=0.66), CCI≥4 (15.2% vs. 15.6%, P=0.95), biopsy-positive sEGDs (75.8% vs. 76.6%, P=0.92), and any recommendation for subsequent surveillance (81.8% vs. 77.9%, P=0.65). A logistic regression model using age, CCI, and LSBE showed an independent association between adherence and older age (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In a single-center VA cohort, sEGD of NDBE was mostly nonadherent to guidelines. Adherent cases were older at baseline with a trend toward more LSBE. A larger study is needed to identify medical and social factors associated with adherence or nonadherence to surveillance.

Columnar islands in Barrett's esophagus: Do they impact Prague C&M criteria and dysplasia grade?

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The standard for classifying Barrett's metaplasia on endoscopy, the Prague C&M criteria, ignores all islands of metaplastic-appearing tissue. The aims of the present study were to measure the prevalence of columnar islands, quantify their impact on metaplasia extent, and determine if they harbor advanced dysplasia.

METHODS

Data from two prospective patient cohorts were retrospectively analyzed. They included adults who underwent upper endoscopy to evaluate for gastroesophageal reflux disease, Barrett's esophagus (BE), dysplasia, or adenocarcinoma between 2003 and 2012 at tertiary care centers in the USA and Germany. The BE pattern, location, and pathology were examined. The extent of BE as defined by the Prague criteria (disregarding the location of islands) was compared with the complete maximal extent of BE (incorporating the location of islands).

RESULTS

A total of 555 patients underwent endoscopy (mean age 60.1 years, 67.2% male, 91.9% white). Among those patients, 191 (34.4%) showed metaplastic-appearing mucosa in islands. Endoscopically, in 101 (52.9%) cases, islands were proximal to the farthest segment of BE as defined by the Prague M location. Histologically, intestinal metaplasia was confirmed in 60 (58.8%) of the 102 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) where islands were biopsied. In 41 (40.2%) cases, the histologically confirmed BE islands extended farther than the maximal segment based on the Prague criteria. Pathology from biopsies of islands either changed the diagnosis or worsened the BE dysplasia grade in 16 (15.7%) of the 102 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Columnar islands are commonly seen on EGD. The Prague C&M criteria may underestimate the maximal extent of BE and overlook the area of highest dysplasia grade.

Editorial: Best Practices in Surveillance of Barrett's Esophagus

Endoscopic surveillance in Barrett's esophagus (BE) has numerous limitations and thus provides several opportunities for improving the effectiveness of our current surveillance strategies. Several risk stratification and prediction tools have been investigated to identify patients at highest risk for progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Persistence of non-dysplastic BE (NDBE) has been proposed as an indicator of lower risk of progression to EAC. This editorial highlights the variable results and methodologies in studies evaluating persistence of NDBE as a risk stratification tool in the surveillance of BE patients and provides guidance for optimizing outcomes in BE patients enrolled in surveillance programs.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of Different Recommended Doses of PPIs and H2RAs in GERD: Network Meta-Analysis and GRADE system

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H₂RAs) are used for gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD); however, the clinical evidence for treatment is poor. We evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of different doses of PPIs, H₂RAs and placebo in adults with GERD. Six online databases were searched through September 1, 2016. All related articles were included and combined with a Bayesian network meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The GRADE systems were employed to assess the main outcome. Ninety-eight RCTs were identified, which included 45,964 participants. Our analysis indicated that the full/standard dose of esomeprazole at 40 mg per day was the most efficient in healing among nine different dosages of PPIs and H₂RAs. The main efficacy outcome did not change after adjustments for the area, age, level of disease from endoscopy, year of publication, pharmaceutical industry sponsorship, Intention-to-treat (ITT)/per-protocol (PP), withdrawal rate, pre-set select design bias, single blinded and unblinded studies, study origination in China, study arms that included zero events, inconsistency node or discontinued drug were accounted for in the meta-regressions and sensitivity analyses. This research suggests that the full/standard doses (40 mg per day) of esomeprazole should be recommended as first-line treatments for GERD in adults for short-term therapy.

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.

Current concepts in the diagnosis and pathobiology of intraepithelial neoplasia: A review by organ system

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE In this report, a team of surgical pathologists has provided a review of intraepithelial neoplasia in a host of (but not all) anatomic sites of interest to colleagues in various medical specialties, namely, uterine cervix, ovary, breast, lung, head and neck, skin, prostate, bladder, pancreas, and esophagus. There is more experience with more readily accessible sites (such as the uterine cervix and skin) than with other anatomic sites, and the lack of uniform terminology, together with divergent biology in various sites, makes it difficult to paint a unifying, relevant portrait. The authors' aim was to provide a framework from which to move forward as we care for patients with such precancerous lesions. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:408-436. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Interobserver reproducibility in pathologist interpretation of columnar-lined esophagus

Confirmation of endoscopically suspected esophageal metaplasia (ESEM) requires histology, but confusion in the histological definition of columnar-lined esophagus (CLE) is a longstanding problem. The aim of this study is to evaluate interpathologist variability in the interpretation of CLE. Thirty pathologists were invited to review three ten-case sets of CLE biopsies. In the first set, the cases were provided with descriptive endoscopy only; in the second and the third sets, ESEM extent using Prague criteria was provided. Moreover, participants were required to refer to a diagnostic chart for evaluation of the third set. Agreement was statistically assessed using Randolph's free-marginal multirater kappa. While substantial agreement in recognizing columnar epithelium (K = 0.76) was recorded, the overall concordance in clinico-pathological diagnosis was low (K = 0.38). The overall concordance rate improved from the first (K = 0.27) to the second (K = 0.40) and third step (K = 0.46). Agreement was substantial when diagnosing Barrett's esophagus (BE) with intestinal metaplasia or inlet patch (K = 0.65 and K = 0.89), respectively, in the third step, while major problems in interpretation of CLE were observed when only cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium was present (K = 0.05-0.29). In conclusion, precise endoscopic description and the use of a diagnostic chart increased consistency in CLE interpretation of esophageal biopsies. Agreement was substantial for some diagnostic categories (BE with intestinal metaplasia and inlet patch) with a well-defined clinical profile. Interpretation of cases with cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium, with or without ESEM, was least consistent, which reflects lack of clarity of definition and results in variable management of this entity.