Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation or surveillance in patients with Barrett's oesophagus with confirmed low-grade dysplasia: a multicentre randomised trial

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Endoscopic Eradication Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on monitoring and management of Barrett's oesophagus and stage I oesophageal adenocarcinoma

Barrett's oesophagus is the only known precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, a cancer with very poor prognosis. The main risk factors for Barrett's oesophagus are a history of gastro-oesophageal acid reflux symptoms and obesity. Men, smokers and those with a family history are also at increased risk. Progression from Barrett's oesophagus to cancer occurs via an intermediate stage, known as dysplasia. However, dysplasia and early cancer usually develop without any clinical signs, often in individuals whose symptoms are well controlled by acid suppressant medications; therefore, endoscopic surveillance is recommended to allow for early diagnosis and timely clinical intervention. Individuals with Barrett's oesophagus need to be fully informed about the implications of this diagnosis and the benefits and risks of monitoring strategies. Pharmacological treatments are recommended for control of symptoms, but not for chemoprevention. Dysplasia and stage 1 oesophageal adenocarcinoma have excellent prognoses, since they can be cured with endoscopic or surgical therapies. Endoscopic resection is the most accurate staging technique for early Barrett's-related oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic ablation is effective and indicated to eradicate Barrett's oesophagus in patients with dysplasia. Future research should focus on improved accuracy for dysplasia detection via new technologies and providing more robust evidence to support pathways for follow-up and treatment.

Comparison of interventions for Barrett's esophagus: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a precancerous condition that has the potential to develop into esophageal cancer (EC). Currently, there is a wide range of management options available for individuals at different pathological stages in Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, there is currently a lack of knowledge regarding their comparative efficacy. To address this gap, we conducted a network meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials to examine the comparative effectiveness of all regimens.

METHODS

Data extracted from eligible randomized controlled trials were utilized in a Bayesian network meta-analysis to examine the relative effectiveness of BE's treatment regimens and determine their ranking in terms of efficacy. The ranking probability for each regimen was assessed using the surfaces under cumulative ranking values. The outcomes under investigation were complete ablation of BE, neoplastic progression of BE, and complete eradication of dysplasia.

RESULTS

We identified twenty-three RCT studies with a total of 1675 participants, and ten different interventions. Regarding complete ablation of non-dysplastic BE, the comparative effectiveness ranking indicated that argon plasma coagulation (APC) was the most effective regimen, with the highest SUCRA value, while surveillance and PPI/H2RA were found to be the least efficacious regimens. For complete ablation of BE with low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or esophageal cancer, photodynamic therapy (PDT) had the highest SUCRA value of 94.1%, indicating it as the best regimen. Additionally, for complete eradication of dysplasia, SUCRA plots showed a trend in ranking PDT as the highest with a SUCRA value of 91.2%. Finally, for neoplastic progression, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and surgery were found to perform significantly better than surveillance. The risk of bias assessment revealed that 6 studies had an overall high risk of bias. However, meta-regression with risk of bias as a covariate did not indicate any influence on the model. In terms of the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis evaluation, a high level of confidence was found for all treatment comparisons.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic surveillance alone or PPI/H2RA alone may not be sufficient for managing BE, even in cases of non-dysplastic BE. However, APC has shown excellent efficacy in treating non-dysplastic BE. For cases of BE with low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or esophageal cancer, PDT may be the optimal intervention as it can induce regression of BE metaplasia and prevent future progression of BE to dysplasia and EC.

Cryotherapy versus radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus with or without early esophageal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the first-line therapy for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). Therefore, cryotherapy has emerged as an alternative treatment option. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of these two techniques based on the rates of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) and dysplasia (CE-D). Adverse events and recurrence have also been reported.

METHODS

An electronic search was conducted using the Medline (PubMed), Embase, LILACS, and Google Scholar databases until December 2022. Studies were included comparing cryotherapy and RFA for treating dysplastic BE with or without early esophageal neoplasia. This study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

Three retrospective cohort studies involving 627 patients were included. Of these, 399 patients underwent RFA, and 228 were treated with cryotherapy. There was no difference in CE-IM (risk difference [RD], -0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.25 to 0.19; p=0.78; I2=86%) as well as in CE-D (RD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.09; p=0.64; I2=70%) between the groups. The absolute number of adverse events was low, and there was no difference in the recurrence rate.

CONCLUSION

Cryotherapy and RFA were equally effective in treating dysplastic BE, with or without early esophageal neoplasia.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2:  ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3:  ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4:  ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5:  ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6:  ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7:  ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8:  ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9:  ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B:  ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C:  ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D:  ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E:  ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11:  After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

Radiofrequency ablation versus hybrid argon plasma coagulation in Barrett's esophagus: a prospective randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and hybrid argon plasma coagulation (H-APC) are established thermal ablation techniques for eradicating Barrett's esophagus after endoscopic resection. This study aimed to compare RFA with H-APC in relation to safety, effectiveness and eradication rates.

METHODS

After endoscopic resection, patients were randomly assigned to H-APC or RFA. A simplified H-APC technique was applied at 60 W. RFA was used with a 90° focal catheter and a simplified protocol of 12 J/cm2 × 3 or with a Halo 360° balloon and 10 J/cm2/cleaning/10 J/cm2. Eradication rates and adverse events were recorded. Patients received follow-up examinations after 3, 6, 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients were finally included in the study (RFA N = 47, H-APC N = 54). The median follow-up period for short-term was 6.0 (CI 5.4-6.9) months and for long term 21 (CI 19.2.5-22.7) months. In total 211 ablations were performed. The eradication rates after long-term follow-up were 74.2% in the RFA group and 82.9% in the H-APC group. Post-interventional pain was significantly greater in the RFA group, with a mean score of 4.56/10 and duration of 7.54 days, in comparison with a mean score of 2.07/10 over 3.59 days in the H-APC group. Stenoses requiring intervention were noted in 3.7% of patients in the H-APC arm and 14.9% of those in the RFA arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Both ablation techniques have good results in relation to the eradication rate, with a slightly better outcome in the H-APC group. The severity and duration of pain were significantly greater in the RFA group.

Endoscopic Management of Dysplastic Barrett's Oesophagus and Early Oesophageal Adenocarcinoma

Barrett's oesophagus is a pathological condition whereby the normal oesophageal squamous mucosa is replaced by specialised, intestinal-type metaplasia, which is strongly linked to chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux. A correct endoscopic and histological diagnosis is pivotal in the management of Barrett's oesophagus to identify patients who are at high risk of progression to neoplasia. The presence and grade of dysplasia and the characteristics of visible lesions within the mucosa of Barrett's oesophagus are both important to guide the most appropriate endoscopic therapy. In this review, we provide an overview on the management of Barrett's oesophagus, with a particular focus on recent advances in the diagnosis and recommendations for endoscopic therapy to reduce the risk of developing oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

What Is "Cold" and What Is "Hot" in Mucosal Ablation for Barrett's Oesophagus-Related Dysplasia: A Practical Guide

Over the last two decades, endoscopic eradication therapy has been established as the therapeutic strategy of choice for patients with Barrett's oesophagus-related dysplasia and early oesophageal adenocarcinoma. With a multimodal approach, ablative therapies have been highly effective in achieving remarkable eradication rates of metaplastic epithelium with an acceptable adverse event rate. Among ablative techniques, radiofrequency ablation is currently considered as the first-line option as its efficacy and safety are strongly supported by relevant data. Nevertheless, radiofrequency ablation is costly, and not universally available, or applicable to every situation. Moreover, primary failure and recurrence rates are not negligible. In the last few years, cryotherapy techniques and hybrid argon plasma coagulation have been increasingly assessed as potential novel ablative therapies. Preliminary data have been promising and suggest that they may even have a role as first-line options, alternatively to radiofrequency ablation. The aim of this review is to provide a practical guide for the ablation of Barrett's oesophagus, with emphasis on the different ablative options.

Radio frequency ablation of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: Outcomes of a single-center registry

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is associated with an increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. The use of radio frequency ablation (RFA) for complete eradication of BE with confirmed low-grade dysplasia (LGD) or high-grade dysplasia (HGD) has been promising in multicenter trials. Our aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy outcomes associated with RFA for patients with BE and LGD/HGD in a single-center setting.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center study conducted at Department of Surgery and Transplantation, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. Data were collected from all patients who had undergone RFA for LGD or HGD from January 2014 to December 2018. Effectiveness outcomes were based on histology: complete eradication of dysplasia (CE-D), defined as all esophageal biopsies being negative for dysplasia at the last biopsy session, and complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) defined as esophageal biopsies being without intestinal metaplasia. Safety outcomes were based on the proportion of complications to the RFA treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 107 patients were identified during the follow-up period (75% men, median age = 65 years); 83% had LGD and 17% had HGD. The median follow-up was 25 months. After the last RFA treatment, CE-D was achieved in 89%. CE-D and CE-IM were achieved in 60%. Complications occurred in 6.5% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with BE and confirmed LGD or HGD, RFA was associated with a high rate of CE-D and a low risk of complications. The observed safety and efficacy outcomes were comparable with those previously reported in multicenter trials, showing that the Danish treatment of BE with LGD and HGD is comparable with those of larger European expert centers.

Predictive factors of radiofrequency ablation failure in the treatment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus

INTRODUCTION

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has become the recommended endoscopic treatment for flat dysplastic Barrett's esophagus. However, the outcomes of this treatment are variable across European countries. Our aim was to report the results of a French high-volume center, and to investigate factors associated with treatment failure.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective study from a prospectively collected database from 2011 to 2020, including all consecutive patients treated with RFA for flat dysplastic Barrett's esophagus. The primary endpoint was the failure rate of esophageal radiofrequency treatment, defined as either persistence of intestinal metaplasia at the end of treatment, or neoplastic progression during RFA.

RESULTS

96 patients treated with a median of four RFA sessions for a mean C5M6 Barrett's esophagus were included in the analysis. Complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia were achieved in 59% and 79% of patients, respectively, resulting in a treatment failure rate of 41%. Ten patients experienced neoplastic progression during treatment. We recorded 14% of post-RFA esophageal strictures, all successfully treated by endoscopic dilatation. Univariate analysis identified the length of Barrett's esophagus and the absence of hiatal hernia as predictive factors for treatment failure, however not confirmed in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, RFA of flat dysplastic Barrett's esophagus had a 41% treatment failure rate. The length of the Barrett's segment might be associated with treatment failure. Although our results confirm a role for RFA in the management of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, the treatment failure rate was higher than expected. This suggest that endoscopists, even in high-volume centers, should receive specific training in RFA.

Development and External Validation of a Model to Predict Complex Treatment After Radiofrequency Ablation for Barrett's Esophagus With Early Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is safe and leads to complete eradication in the majority of patients. However, a subgroup will experience a more complex treatment course with a risk for failure or disease progression. Early identification of these patients may improve patient counseling and treatment outcomes. We aimed to develop a prognostic model for a complex treatment course.

METHODS

We collected data from a nationwide registry that captures outcomes for all patients undergoing endoscopic eradication therapy for early BE neoplasia. A complex treatment course was defined as neoplastic progression, treatment failure, or the need for endoscopic resection during the radiofrequency ablation treatment phase. We developed a prognostic model using logistic regression. We externally validated our model in an independent registry.

RESULTS

A total of 1386 patients were included, of whom 78 (6%) had a complex treatment course. Our model identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer with a visible lesion containing high-grade dysplasia/cancer, and patients with less than 50% squamous conversion after radiofrequency ablation were identified as high risk for a complex treatment. This applied to 8% of the study population and included 93% of all treatment failures and 76% of all patients with advanced neoplastic progression. The model appeared robust in multiple sensitivity analyses and performed well in external validation (area under the curve, 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a prognostic model that identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma and those with poor squamous regeneration as high risk for a complex treatment course. The good performance in external validation suggests that it may be used in clinical management (Netherlands Trial Register: NL7039).

Management of Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus and Early Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

While patients with Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia may benefit from endoscopic surveillance, those with low-grade dysplasia may be managed with either endoscopic surveillance or endoscopic eradication. Patients with Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and/or intramucosal adenocarcinoma will generally require endoscopic eradication therapy. The management of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma is predominantly endoscopic, with multiple effective methods available for the resection of raised neoplasia and ablation of flat neoplasia. High-dose proton-pump inhibitor therapy is advised during the treatment of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. After the endoscopic eradication of Barrett's esophagus and associated neoplasia, surveillance is required for the diagnosis and retreatment of recurrence or progression.

Barrett Esophagus: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Barrett esophagus is characterized by the replacement of normal esophageal squamous cell epithelium with columnar metaplasia and affects approximately 5% of people in the US and approximately 1% worldwide. Approximately 3% to 5% of patients with Barrett esophagus will be diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma in their lifetime.

OBSERVATIONS

Barrett esophagus affects approximately 2.3% to 8.3% of people with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and approximately 1.2% to 5.6% of people without GERD. Characteristics associated with Barrett esophagus include older age (prevalence of approximately 1.1% in individuals older than 50 years compared with 0.3% in those 50 years or younger), male sex, and smoking (prevalence of approximately 12% in people who smoke cigarettes compared with 1.1% in those who do not smoke cigarettes). The histopathology of Barrett esophagus progresses from metaplasia to dysplasia and, without treatment, can progress to adenocarcinoma. People with Barrett esophagus have approximately a 0.2% to 0.5% annual rate of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma. Management of Barrett esophagus primarily consists of acid-suppressive medications to reduce underlying GERD symptoms and surveillance endoscopy every 3 to 5 years. In patients with Barrett esophagus and dysplasia or early cancer, endoscopic therapy consisting of resection and ablation successfully treats 80% to 90% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Barrett esophagus affects approximately 5% of people in the US and approximately 1% worldwide and is associated with an increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. First-line therapy for Barrett esophagus consists of proton-pump inhibitors for control of reflux symptoms, but their role in chemoprevention is unclear. Surveillance with upper endoscopy is recommended by practice guidelines to monitor for progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma, but randomized clinical trials are lacking.

Endoscopic Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus with Low-Grade Dysplasia

Barrett’s Esophagus is a common condition associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. It is well known that it has an association with a higher incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma, but this neoplastic transformation is first preceded by the onset of low and high-grade dysplasia. The evaluation of low grade dysplastic esophageal mucosa is still controversial; although endoscopic surveillance is preferred, several minimally invasive endoscopic therapeutic approaches are available. Endoscopic mucosal resection and radiofrequency ablation are the most used endoscopic treatments for the eradication of low-grade dysplasia, respectively, for nodular and flat dysplasia. Novel endoscopic treatments are cryotherapy ablation and argon plasma coagulation, that have good rates of eradication with less complications and post-procedural pain.

Barrett’s esophagus: Review of natural history and comparative efficacy of endoscopic and surgical therapies

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Progression to cancer typically occurs in a stepwise fashion through worsening dysplasia and ultimately, invasive neoplasia. Established EAC with deep involvement of the esophageal wall and/or metastatic disease is invariably associated with poor long-term survival rates. This guides the rationale of surveillance of Barrett’s in an attempt to treat lesions at an earlier, and potentially curative stage. The last two decades have seen a paradigm shift in management of Barrett’s with rapid expansion in the role of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for management of dysplastic and early neoplastic BE, and there have been substantial changes to international consensus guidelines for management of early BE based on evolving evidence. This review aims to assist the physician in the therapeutic decision-making process with patients by comprehensive review and summary of literature surrounding natural history of Barrett’s by histological stage, and the effectiveness of interventions in attenuating the risk posed by its natural history. Key findings were as follows. Non-dysplastic Barrett’s is associated with extremely low risk of progression, and interventions cannot be justified. The annual risk of cancer progression in low grade dysplasia is between 1%-3%; EET can be offered though evidence for its benefit remains confined to highly select settings. High-grade dysplasia progresses to cancer in 5%-10% per year; EET is similarly effective to and less morbid than surgery and should be routinely performed for this indication. Risk of nodal metastases in intramucosal cancer is 2%-4%, which is comparable to operative mortality rate, so EET is usually preferred. Submucosal cancer is associated with nodal metastases in 14%-41% hence surgery remains standard of care, except for select situations.

Efficacy and Safety of Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Endoscopic Surveillance for Barrett’s Esophagus With Low-Grade Dysplasia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background and Aims

Barrett’s esophagus with low-grade dysplasia (BE-LGD) carries a risk of progression to Barrett’s esophagus with high-grade dysplasia (BE-HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) appears to be a safe and efficacious method to eradicate Barrett’s esophagus. However, a confirmed consensus regarding treatment of BE-LGD with RFA vs. endoscopic surveillance is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety for RFA vs. endoscopic surveillance in decreasing the risk of BE-LGD progression to BE-HGD or EAC.

Methods

Relevant studies published before May 1, 2021 were identified by searching relevant medical databases. The primary outcome was the rate of progression BE-LGD to HGD and/or EAC after treatment with RFA and endoscopic surveillance. The secondary outcome was the rate of complete eradication of dysplasia (CE-D) and complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) after treatment with RFA and endoscopic surveillance. Adverse events were also extracted and evaluated.

Results

Three randomized controlled trials were eligible for analysis. The pooled estimate of rate of neoplastic progression of BE-LGD to HGD or EAC was much lower in the RFA group than the endoscopic surveillance group (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.07–0.93; P = 0.04), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 55%). Subgroup analysis based on progression grade was performed. The pooled rate of progression of BE-LGD to HGD was much lower in the RFA group than the endoscopic surveillance group (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.07–0.71; P = 0.01), with low heterogeneity (I² = 15%). Although the pooled risk of progression of BE-LGD to EAC was slightly lower in the RFA group than the endoscopic surveillance group (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.05–6.76), the result was not statistically significant (P = 0.65). RFA also was associated a higher rate of CE-D and CE-IM both at the end of endoscopic treatment and during follow-up. However, the rate of adverse events was slightly higher after RFA treatment.

Conclusion

RFA decreases the risk of BE-LGD progression to BE-HGD. However, given the uncertain course of LGD and the potential for esophageal stricture after RFA, treatment options should be fully considered and weighed.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021266128, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42021266128).