Assessment of efficacy and safety of advanced endoscopic irreversible electroporation catheter in the esophagus

Nonthermal irreversible electroporation (NTIRE) is emerging as a promising tissue ablation technique. However, maintaining irreversible electroporation (IRE) electrodes against displacement during strong esophageal spasms remains an obstacle. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of newly designed balloon-type endoscopic IRE catheters. Six pigs were randomly allocated to each catheter group, and each pig was subjected to four ablations at alternating voltages of 1500 V and 2000 V. Esophagogastroscopy was performed during the IRE. The ability of balloon-type catheters to execute complete IRE with 40 pulses was assessed. The success rate was higher for the balloon-type catheter than that for the basket-type (12/12 [100%] vs. 2/12 [16.7%], p < 0.001). Following gross inspection and histologic analysis of the 1500-V vs. 2000-V balloon-type catheter revealed a larger mucosal damage area (105.3 mm2 vs. 140.8 mm2, p = 0.004) and greater damage depth (476 μm vs. 900 μm, p = 0.02). Histopathology of the ablated tissue revealed separated epithelium, inflamed lamina propria, congested muscularis mucosa, necrotized submucosa, and disorganized muscularis propria. Balloon-type catheters demonstrated efficacy, achieving full electrical pulse sequences under NTIRE conditions, and a safe histological profile below 2000 V (1274 V/cm). Optimal electrical conditions and electrode arrays pose ongoing challenges.

Nonthermal resection device for ablation of Barrett's esophagus: a feasibility and safety study

BACKGROUND

Several techniques exist for the eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE); however, all have limitations regarding successful conversion to squamous epithelium and a complication profile. We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of a new nonthermal device, the EndoRotor, for the eradication of BE as a first-line ablation technique.

METHODS

Patients with BE were prospectively included at two tertiary referral centers in The Netherlands.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

BE length 2-5 cm, with low grade dysplasia, high grade dysplasia, or residual BE after endoscopic resection (ER) of a lesion containing early neoplasia.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

previous ER > 50 % circumference, or previous ablation therapy. Follow-up endoscopy was performed 3 months after ablation therapy. Outcomes were the percentage of endoscopically visible BE surface regression and complications.

RESULTS

30 patients were included (age 66 years, interquartile range [IQR] 59-73, median BE C0M3, 25 male). Overall, 18 patients underwent ER prior to ablation. Median percentage BE ablated was 100 % (IQR 94 %-100 %). Median visual BE surface regression at 3-month follow-up was 80 % (IQR 68 %-95 %). Multiple residual Barrett's islands were commonly seen. Six patients (20 %) had a treatment-related complication requiring intervention, including one perforation (3 %), one postprocedural hemorrhage (3 %), and four strictures (13 %). Post-procedural pain was reported in 18 patients (60 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ablation of BE using this novel nonthermal device was found to be technically demanding, with a longer procedure time compared with established ablation techniques and a high complication rate. Based on these results, we do not recommend its use as a first-line ablation technique for the eradication of BE.

Learning curves and the influence of procedural volume for the treatment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resections and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are the established treatments for Barrett's-associated dysplasia and early esophageal neoplasia. The UK RFA Registry collects patient outcomes from 24 centers treating patients in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Learning curves for treatment of Barrett's dysplasia and the impact of center caseload on patient outcomes is still unknown.

METHODS

We examined outcomes of 678 patients treated with RFA in the UK Registry using risk-adjusted cumulative sum control chart (RA-CUSUM) analysis to identify change points in complete resolution of intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) and complete resolution of dysplasia (CR-D) outcomes. We compared outcomes between those treated at high-volume (>100 enrolled patients), medium-volume (51-100), and low-volume (<50) centers.

RESULTS

There was no association between center volume and CR-IM and CR-D rates, but recurrence rates were lower in high-volume versus low-volume centers (log rank P = .001). There was a significant change point for outcomes at 12 cases for CR-D (reduction from 24.5% to 10.4%; P < .001) and at 18 cases for CR-IM (30.7% to 18.6%; P < .001) from RA-CUSUM curve analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that 18 supervised cases of endoscopic ablation may be required before competency in endoscopic treatment of Barrett's dysplasia can be achieved. The difference in outcomes between a high-volume and low-volume center does not support further centralization of services to only high-volume centers.

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.

Current Endoscopic Approaches for the Treatment of Barrett Esophagus

Barrett esophagus (BE) is the only identifiable premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a cancer associated with a poor 5-year survival rate. The stepwise pathologic progression of BE to invasive cancer provides an opportunity to halt progression and potentially decrease incidence and ultimately the morbidity and mortality related to this lethal cancer. Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) in patients at increased risk of progression to invasive EAC (intramucosal EAC, high-grade dysplasia, and low-grade dysplasia) is a practice that is endorsed by multiple societies and has replaced esophagectomy as the standard of care for these patients. Although the effectiveness, safety, and durability of EET have been demonstrated in several studies, this review addresses the several challenges with EET that need to be considered to optimize patient outcomes. Finally, the critical role of training, competence, and quality indicators in EET are emphasized in this era of value-based health care practice.

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.

Measures of trainee performance in advanced endoscopy: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The diversity, technical skills required, and risk inherent to advanced endoscopy techniques all contribute to complex training curricula and steep learning curves. Since trainees develop endoscopy skills at different rates, there has been a shift towards competency-based training and certification. Validated endoscopy performance measures for trainees are, therefore, necessary. The aim of this systematic review was to describe and critically assess the existing evidence regarding measures of performance for trainees in advanced endoscopy.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature from January 1980 to January 2016 was carried out using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of knowledge databases. MeSH terms related to 'advanced endoscopy' and 'performance' were applied to a highly sensitive search strategy. The main outcomes were face, content, and construct validity, as well as reliability.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1,662 studies and 77 met the inclusion criteria after abstract and full-text review (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)=23, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)=30, colonoscopic polypectomy (CP)=11, balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE)=7, luminal stenting=3, radiofrequency ablation (RFA)=2, and endoscopic muscosal resection (EMR)=1). Good validity and reliability were found for measurement tools of overall performance in ERCP, EUS and CP, with applications for both patient-based and simulator training models. A number of specific technical skills were also shown to be valid measures of performance. These include: selective biliary cannulation, sphincterotomy, biliary stent placement, stone extraction and procedure time for ERCP; pancreatic solid mass T-staging, EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) procedure time, number of EUS-FNA passes and puncture precision for EUS; procedure time and en bloc resection rate for CP; retrograde fluoroscopy time for BAE; and mean number of endoscopy sessions required to achieve complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CIEM) for RFA. The evidence for EMR and luminal stenting is of insufficient quality to make recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified multiple valid and readily available performance measures for advanced endoscopy trainees for ERCP, EUS, CP, BAE and RFA procedures. These tools should be considered in advanced endoscopy training programs wishing to move away from apprenticeship-based training and towards competency-based learning with the help of patient-based and simulator tools.

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.

Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Treating Large Early Esophageal Squamous Cell Neoplasia

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can potentially be applied for early esophageal squamous cell neoplasia (ESCN); however, no study has directly compared these 2 modalities.We retrospectively enrolled the patients with flat-type "large" (length ≥3 cm extending ≥1/2 of the circumference of esophagus) early ESCNs treated endoscopically. The main outcome measurements were complete response at 12 months, and adverse events.Of a total of 65 patients, 18 were treated with RFA and 47 with ESD. The procedure time of RFA was significantly shorter than that of ESD (126.6 vs 34.8 min; P < 0.001). The complete resection rate of ESD and complete response rate after primary RFA were 89.3% and 77.8%, respectively. Based on the histological evaluation of the post-ESD specimens showed 14 of 47 (29.8%) had histological upstaging compared with the pre-ESD biopsies, and 4 of them had lymphovascular invasion requiring chemoradiation or surgery. After additional therapy for residual lesions, 46 (97.9%) patients in the ESD group and 17 (94.4%) patients in the RFA group achieved a complete response at 12 months. Four patients (8.5%) developed major procedure-related adverse events in the ESD group, but none in the RFA group. In patients with lesions occupying more than 3/4 of the circumference, a significantly higher risk of esophageal stenosis was noted in the ESD group compared with RFA group (83% vs 27%, P = 0.01), which required more sessions of dilatation to resolve the symptoms (median, 13 vs 3, P = 0.04). There were no procedure-related mortality or neoplastic progression in either group; however, 1 patient who received ESD and 1 who received RFA developed local recurrence during a median follow-up period of 32.4 (range, 13-68) and 18.0 (range, 13-41) months, respectively.RFA and ESD are equally effective in the short-term treatment of early flat large ESCNs; however, more adverse events occur with ESD, especially in lesions extending more than 3/4 of the circumference. RFA does not allow for pathology to evaluate the curability after ablation, and thus currently the use for invasive ESCNs should be conservative until longer follow-up studies are available.

Effects of the Learning Curve on Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation for Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Complete eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) often requires multiple sessions of radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Little is known about the effects of case volume on the safety and efficacy of RFA or about the presence or contour of learning curves for this procedure.

METHODS

We collected data from the US RFA Patient Registry (from 148 institutions) for patients who underwent RFA for BE from July 2007 to July 2011. We analyzed the effects of the number of patients treated by individual endoscopists and individual centers on safety and efficacy outcomes of RFA. Outcomes, including stricture, bleeding, hospitalization, and complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CEIM), were assessed using logistic regression. The effects of center and investigator experience on numbers of treatment sessions to achieve CEIM were examined using linear regression.

RESULTS

After we controlled for potential confounders, we found that as the experience of endoscopists and centers increased with cases, the numbers of treatment sessions required to achieve CEIM decreased. This relationship persisted after adjusting for patient age, sex, race, length of BE, and presence of pretreatment dysplasia (P < .01). Center experience was not significantly associated with overall rates of CEIM or complete eradication of dysplasia. We did not observe any learning curve with regard to risks of stricture, gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation, or hospitalization (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on analysis of a large multicenter registry, efficiency of the treatment, as measured by number of sessions needed to achieve CEIM, increased with case volume, indicating a learning curve effect. This trend began to disappear after treatment of approximately 30 patients by the center or individual endoscopist. However, there was no significant association between safety or efficacy outcomes and previous case volume.

Ablative Endoscopic Therapies for Barrett's-Esophagus-Related Neoplasia

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is more common in developed countries. Endoscopic therapy is an effective treatment method in management of dysplastic BE. Ablation by thermal energy, freezing, or photochemical injury completely eradicates dysplasia and specialized intestinal metaplasia resulting in neosquamation of esophagus. Among the ablative modalities, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the most studied with safe, effective, and durable long-term outcomes. Cryotherapy, argon plasma coagulation, and photodynamic therapy can be offered in select patients when RFA is unavailable, has failed, or is contraindicated. Future research on natural disease progression, biomarkers, advanced imaging, and application of endoscopic techniques will lead to better clinical outcomes for BE-associated neoplasia.

Meta-analysis of endoscopic therapy for low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

Background

The optimal management of patients with Barrett's-associated low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is unclear. The objective of this study was to identify systematically all reports of endoscopic treatment of LGD, and to assess outcomes in terms of disease progression, eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia, and complication rates.

Methods

A systematic review of articles reporting endoscopic treatment of LGD was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched to identify the relevant literature. Rates of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) and dysplasia (CE-D) were reported. The pooled incidence of progression to cancer was calculated following endoscopic therapy.

Results

Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting outcomes of endoscopic therapy for 521 patients with LGD. The pooled incidence of progression to cancer was 3·90 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·27 to 9·10) per 1000 patient-years. CE-IM and CE-D were achieved in 67·8 (95 per cent c.i. 50·2 to 81·5) and 88·9 (83·9 to 92·5) per cent of patients respectively. The commonest adverse event was stricture formation.

Conclusion

Reports of endoscopic therapy were heterogeneous and follow-up periods were short. There is a high likelihood of historical overdiagnosis of LGD. Endoscopic therapy, particularly radiofrequency ablation, appears safe and effective at eradicating LGD, but does not eliminate the risk of progression to cancer.

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.

Efficacy and durability of radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's Esophagus: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), radiofrequency ablation (RFA) safely and effectively eradicates dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia. We aimed to determine the efficacy and durability of RFA for patients with dysplastic and nondysplastic BE.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies identified in PubMed and EMBASE that reported the proportion of patients treated with RFA who had complete eradication of dysplasia (CE-D) and intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM), and the proportion of patients with recurrent IM after successful treatment. Pooled estimates of CE-D, CE-IM, IM recurrence, and adverse events were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 18 studies of 3802 patients reporting efficacy and 6 studies of 540 patients reporting durability. Ten were prospective cohort studies, 9 were retrospective cohort studies, and 1 was a randomized trial. CE-IM was achieved in 78% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 70%-86%) and CE-D was achieved in 91% (95% CI, 87%-95%). After eradication, IM recurred in 13% (95% CI, 9%-18%). Progression to cancer occurred in 0.2% of patients during treatment and in 0.7% of those after CE-IM. Esophageal stricture was the most common adverse event and was reported in 5% of patients (95% CI, 3%-7%). Confidence in most summary estimates was limited by a high degree of heterogeneity, which did not appear to be caused by single outlier studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of BE with RFA results in CE-D and CE-IM in a high proportion of patients, with few recurrences of IM after treatment and a low rate of adverse events. Despite the large amount of study heterogeneity, these data provide additional information for patients and providers to make informed treatment decisions.

Radiofrequency ablation for long- and ultralong-segment Barrett's esophagus: a comparative long-term follow-up study

BACKGROUND

The safety, efficacy, and durability of radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with or without EMR, have been established for long-segment Barrett's esophagus (LSBE). Ablating ultralong-segment Barrett's esophagus (ULSBE) may be associated with increased stricture formation, eradication failure, and treatment session requirements.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to compare eradication and stricture rates between LSBE (≥3 to <8 cm) and ULSBE (≥8 cm). Our secondary objective was to evaluate treatment durability and session requirements.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

SETTING

Tertiary care facility.

PATIENTS

A total of 72 patients (34 ULSBE, 38 LSBE; mean Barrett's segment length of 10.8 and 4.7 cm) underwent RFA between August 2005 and September 2010. Mean follow-up was 45 and 34 months, respectively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Eradication and complication rates for ULSBE and LSBE.

RESULTS

Eradication rates for dysplasia (90% vs 88%, P = 1.0) and intestinal metaplasia (IM) (77% vs 82%, P = .77) were similar. ULSBE patients required more overall (P < .01) and circumferential (P < .01) RFA; however, stricture rates were identical (14%). There was no dysplasia recurrence, and IM recurrence was similar (ULSBE, 23%; LSBE, 16%; P = .52). At 3 years, IM remained eradicated in 65% of ULSBE and 82% of LSBE, without maintenance RFA. On multivariate regression analysis, increasing Barrett's length was associated with a reduced likelihood for eradicating IM (odds ratio 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00), but not dysplasia (odds ratio 1.13; 95% CI, 0.95-1.35).

LIMITATIONS

Single center.

CONCLUSION

ULSBE can be treated in its entirety at each session with efficacy and safety comparable to LSBE. ULSBE requires more effort to achieve IM eradication, and RFA is less durable in maintaining this eradication at 3-year follow-up.