Correlation of the location of superficial Barrett’s esophageal adenocarcinoma (s-BEA) with the direction of gastroesophageal reflux

Background: Superficial Barrett’s esophageal adenocarcinoma (s-BEA) in Barrett’s esophagus frequently occurs in the right wall of the esophagus. Our aim was to examine the correlation between the location of s-BEA and the direction of acid and non-acid reflux in patients with Barrett’s esophagus.

Patients and methods: We performed 24-h pH monitoring in 33 s-BEA patients using a pH catheter with eight sensors. One sensor was located at the 6 o’clock position in the lower esophagus and sensors 1 – 8 were arranged counterclockwise at the same level. The catheter was positioned at the same level as the s-BEA. We measured the maximal total duration of acid (MTD-A) and non-acid (MTD-NA) reflux. When the direction of MTD-A and MTD-NA coincided with the location of the s-BEA, the case was defined as coincidental and we calculated the rate of coincidence, and the probability of the rate of coincidence was estimated with 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI).

Results: Among the 33 cases of s-BEA examined, the rate of coincidence of both MTD-A and MTD-NA was 24/33 (72.7 %) (95 %CI 0.54 – 0.87). The rate of coincidence of either MTD-A or MTD-NA was 30/33 (90.9 %) (95 %CI 0.76 – 0.98).

Conclusions: Our study revealed that the location of s-BEA mostly corresponds to the direction of MTD-A or MTD-NA. Accurate observation of the distribution of acid or non-acid reflux by pH monitoring would aid early detection of s-BEA by endoscopy.

• References

• 1 Pech O, Gossner L, Manner H et al. Prospective evaluation of the macroscopic types and location of early Barrett’s neoplasia in 380 lesions. Endoscopy 2007; 39: 588-593
• 2 Kariyawasam VC, Bourke MJ, Hourigan LF et al. Circumferential location predicts the risk of high-grade dysplasia and early adenocarcinoma in short-segment Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 938-944
• 3 Cassani L, Sumner E, Slaughter JC et al. Directional distribution of neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus is not influenced by distance from the gastroesophageal junction. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 877-882
• 4 Kinoshita Y, Furuta K, Adachi K et al. Asymmetrical circumferential distribution of esophagogastric junctional lesions: anatomical and physiological considerations. J Gastroenterol 2009; 44: 812-818
• 5 Edebo A, Vieth M, Tam W et al. Circumferential and axial distribution of esophageal mucosal damage in reflux disease. Dis Esophagus 2007; 20: 232-238
• 6 Katsube T, Adachi K, Furuta K et al. Difference in localization of esophageal mucosal breaks among grades of esophagitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 21: 1656-1659
• 7 Okita K, Amano Y, Takahashi Y et al. Barrett’s esophagus in Japanese patients: its prevalence, form, and elongation. J Gastroenterol 2008; 43: 928-934
• 8 Ohara S, Furuta K, Adachi K et al. Radially asymmetric gastroesophageal acid reflux in the distal esophagus: examinations with novel pH sensor catheter equipped with 8 pH sensors. J Gastroenterol 2012; 47: 1221-1227
• 9 Japan Esophageal Society. Japanese classification of esophageal cancer. 10th. edn. Tokyo: Kanehara Shuppan; 2008
• 10 Fass R, Hell RW, Garewal HS et al. Correlation of oesophageal acid exposure with Barrett’s oesophagus length. Gut 2001; 48: 310-313
• 11 Menges M, Muller M, Zeitz M. Increased acid and bile reflux in Barrett’s esophagus compared to reflux esophagitis, and effect of proton pump inhibitor therapy. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 331-337
• 12 Kuper H, Adami HO, Trichopoulos D. Infections as a major preventable cause of human cancer. J Intern Med 2000; 248: 171-183
• 13 Parkin DM. The global health burden of infection-associated cancers in the year 2002. Int J Cancer 2006; 118: 3030-3044
• 14 Omae M, Fujisaki J, Horiuchi Y et al. Safety, efficacy, and long-term outcomes for endoscopic submucosal dissection of early esophagogastric junction cancer. Gastric Cancer 2013; 16: 147-154
• 15 Yamada M, Oda I, Nonaka S et al. Long-term outcome of endoscopic resection of superficial adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 992-996
• 16 Goda K, Singh R, Oda I et al. Current status of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of superficial Barrett’s adenocarcinoma in Asia-Pacific region. Dig Endosc 2013; 25 (Suppl. 02) 146-150
• 17 Stein HJ, Feith M, Bruecher BL et al. Early esophageal cancer: pattern of lymphatic spread and prognostic factors for long-term survival after surgical resection. Ann Surg 2005; 242: 566-573 ; discussion 573–565
• 18 Buskens CJ, Westerterp M, Lagarde SM et al. Prediction of appropriateness of local endoscopic treatment for high-grade dysplasia and early adenocarcinoma by EUS and histopathologic features. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 703-710
• 19 Playford RJ. New British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut 2006; 55: 442
• 20 Hirota WK, Zuckerman MJ, Adler DG et al. ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in the surveillance of premalignant conditions of the upper GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 570-580
• 21 Wang KK, Sampliner RE. Updated guidelines 2008 for the diagnosis, surveillance and therapy of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 788-797
• 22 van Sandick JW, van Lanschot JJ, Kuiken BW et al. Impact of endoscopic biopsy surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus on pathological stage and clinical outcome of Barrett's carcinoma. Gut 1998; 43: 216-222
• 23 Streitz Jr JM, Andrews Jr CW, Ellis Jr FH. Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus. Does it help?. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993; 105: 383-387 ; discussion 387–388
• 24 Sharma P, Hawes RH, Bansal A et al. Standard endoscopy with random biopsies versus narrow band imaging targeted biopsies in Barrett’s oesophagus: a prospective, international, randomised controlled trial. Gut 2013; 62: 15-21