Detection of lesions in dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus by community and expert endoscopists

Abstract

Background and aims Endoscopic treatment of Barrett’s esophagus (BE) consists of endoscopic resection of visible lesions followed by radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for any remaining flat BE. Because RFA is only justified in flat BE, detection of neoplastic lesions (high grade dysplasia [HGD] and early adenocarcinoma [EAC]) is crucial. We hypothesized that the detection of visible lesions containing HGD or EAC would be superior in BE expert centers compared with community hospitals, thereby supporting centralization of therapy for BE-related neoplasia.

Methods Patients referred with histologically proven HGD or EAC to two Dutch BE expert centers were included. Referral letters, and endoscopy and pathology reports were reviewed for the description of the BE, presence of lesions, and histopathological analysis of target and random tissue sampling. Primary outcome was the endoscopic detection rate of lesions containing histopathologically proven neoplasia (HGD and/or EAC) in community and expert centers.

Results There were 198 patients referred from 37 community hospitals (median referral time 55 days [interquartile range 33 – 85]). Detection rates for visible lesions were 60 % in community centers (75 % in patients with a biopsy diagnosis of EAC, 47 % in HGD) and 87 % in expert centers (98 % in EAC, 75 % in HGD); P < 0.001. Even with HGD/EAC on random biopsies from the index endoscopy, the yield at repeat endoscopy was < 50 % in community hospitals. In 79 patients referred solely because of random biopsy results, a lesion requiring endoscopic resection or surgery was found in 76 % by the expert endoscopists.

Conclusions Endoscopists at community hospitals detect neoplastic lesions at a significantly lower rate. These data support the value of BE expert centers for work-up and further treatment of BE.

• References

• 1 Shaheen NJ, Richter JE. Barrett’s oesophagus. Lancet 2009; 373: 850-861
• 2 American Gastroenterological Association. Spechler SJ, Sharma P. et al. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on the management of Barrett’s esophagus. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1084-1091
• 3 Desai TK, Krishnan K, Samala N. et al. The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus: a meta-analysis. Gut 2012; 61: 970-976
• 4 Wani S, Falk G, Hall M. et al. Patients with nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus have low risks for developing dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 220-227 quiz e226
• 5 Bhat S, Coleman HG, Yousef F. et al. Risk of malignant progression in Barrett’s esophagus patients: results from a large population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 1049-1057
• 6 Hvid-Jensen F, Pedersen L, Drewes AM. et al. Incidence of adenocarcinoma among patients with Barrett’s esophagus. NEJM 2011; 365: 1375-1383
• 7 Gaddam S, Singh M, Balasubramanian G. et al. Persistence of nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus identifies patients at lower risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma: results from a large multicenter cohort. Gastroenterology 2013; 145: 548-553; e541
• 8 Duits LC, Phoa KN, Curvers WL. et al. Barrett’s oesophagus patients with low-grade dysplasia can be accurately risk-stratified after histological review by an expert pathology panel. Gut 2015; 64: 700-706
• 9 Curvers WL, ten Kate FJ, Krishnadath KK. et al. Low-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus: overdiagnosed and underestimated. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1523-1530
• 10 Vieth M, Schubert B, Lang-Schwarz K. et al. Frequency of Barrett’s neoplasia after initial negative endoscopy with biopsy: a long-term histopathological follow-up study. Endoscopy 2006; 38: 1201-1205
• 11 Shaheen NJ, Falk GW, Iyer PG. et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 30-50
• 12 Moss A, Bourke MJ, Hourigan LF. et al. Endoscopic resection for Barrett’s high-grade dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma: an essential staging procedure with long-term therapeutic benefit. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1276-1283
• 13 May A, Gossner L, Pech O. et al. Local endoscopic therapy for intraepithelial high-grade neoplasia and early adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s oesophagus: acute-phase and intermediate results of a new treatment approach. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2002; 14: 1085-1091
• 14 Fitzgerald RC, di Pietro M, Ragunath K. et al. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut 2014; 63: 7-42
• 15 ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. Evans JA, Early DS. et al. The role of endoscopy in Barrett’s esophagus and other premalignant conditions of the esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 1087-1094
• 16 CBO Kwaliteitsinstituut voor de Gezondheidszorg. Richtlijn diagnostiek en behandeling oesofaguscarcinoom. In: Alphen aan den Rijn. Van Zuiden Communications. 2005
• 17 Sharma P, Dent J, Armstrong D. et al. The development and validation of an endoscopic grading system for Barrett’s esophagus: the Prague C & M criteria. Gastroenterology 2006; 131: 1392-1399
• 18 The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1, 2002. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: S3-S43
• 19 Schlemper RJ, Kato Y, Stolte M. Review of histological classifications of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia: differences in diagnosis of early carcinomas between Japanese and Western pathologists. J Gastroenterol 2001; 36: 445-456
• 20 Schlemper RJ, Kato Y, Stolte M. Diagnostic criteria for gastrointestinal carcinomas in Japan and Western countries: proposal for a new classification system of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2000; 15: G49-G57
• 21 Cameron GR, Jayasekera CS, Williams R. et al. Detection and staging of esophageal cancers within Barrett’s esophagus is improved by assessment in specialized Barrett’s units. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 971-983; e971
• 22 Qumseya BJ, Wang H, Badie N. et al. Advanced imaging technologies increase detection of dysplasia and neoplasia in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 1562-1570; e1561 – e1562
• 23 Gupta N, Gaddam S, Wani SB. et al. Longer inspection time is associated with increased detection of high-grade dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 531-538
• 24 Curvers WL, Peters FP, Elzer B. et al. Quality of Barrett’s surveillance in The Netherlands: a standardized review of endoscopy and pathology reports. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 20: 601-607
• 25 Ramus JR, Caygill CP, Gatenby PA. et al. Current United Kingdom practice in the diagnosis and management of columnar-lined oesophagus: results of the United Kingdom National Barrett’s Oesophagus Registry endoscopist questionnaire. Eur J Cancer Prev 2008; 17: 422-425
• 26 Fitzgerald RC, Saeed IT, Khoo D. et al. Rigorous surveillance protocol increases detection of curable cancers associated with Barrett’s esophagus. Dig Dis Sci 2001; 46: 1892-1898
• 27 Wani S, Abrams J, Edmundowicz SA. et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection results in change of histologic diagnosis in Barrett’s esophagus patients with visible and flat neoplasia: a multicenter cohort study. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58: 1703-1709
• 28 Ayers K, Shi C, Washington K. et al. Expert pathology review and endoscopic mucosal resection alters the diagnosis of patients referred to undergo therapy for Barrett’s esophagus. Surg Endosc 2013; 27: 2836-2840
• 29 Phoa KN, Pouw RE, Bisschops R. et al. Multimodality endoscopic eradication for neoplastic Barrett oesophagus: results of an European multicentre study (EURO-II). Gut 2016; 65: 555-562
• 30 Haidry RJ, Butt MA, Dunn J. et al. Radiofrequency ablation for early oesophageal squamous neoplasia: outcomes from United Kingdom registry. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: 6011-6019