Endoscopy 2013; 45(11): 859-865
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1344584
Original article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Argon plasma coagulation ablation versus endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus: late outcomes from two randomized trials

Corina Sie
1   Flinders University Department of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia
,
Tim Bright
1   Flinders University Department of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia
,
Mark Schoeman
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia
,
Philip Game
3   University of Adelaide Discipline of Surgery, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia
,
William Tam
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia
,
Peter Devitt
3   University of Adelaide Discipline of Surgery, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia
,
David Watson
1   Flinders University Department of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 25 February 2013

accepted after revision 18 June 2013

Publication Date:
09 September 2013 (online)

Background and study aim: Argon plasma coagulation (APC) has been used to ablate dysplastic and nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus. We determined the longer-term efficacy of APC ablation within two randomized controlled trials of APC versus surveillance for Barrett’s esophagus in patients in whom gastroesophageal reflux was controlled by either surgery or proton pump inhibitors.

Patients and methods: 129 patients (surgical trial 70, medical trial 59) with Barrett’s esophagus (nondysplastic or low grade dysplasia) were randomly allocated to either ablation using APC or to continuing endoscopy surveillance. Outcomes were determined at three time points: short-term (12 months), mid-term (42 – 75 months) and long-term (> 84 months).

Results: In the APC groups, initial ablation of > 95 % of the Barrett’s esophagus was achieved in 61 of 63 patients; the > 95 % ablation persisted in 47 of 56 patients at short-term follow-up, in 33 of 49 at mid-term and in 21 of 32 at long-term follow-up. In the surveillance groups, the length of Barrett’s esophagus reduced from a mean of 4.2 cm to 2.7 cm at long-term follow-up. High grade dysplasia (HGD) developed in 1 patient in the APC groups and in 3 in the surveillance groups. Low grade dysplasia developed in 1 APC patient and in 6 surveillance patients.

Conclusions: APC ablation reduced the extent of Barrett’s esophagus, and this reduction was maintained in some patients at longer-term follow-up. However, progression to HGD can still occur despite APC ablation, suggesting endoscopic surveillance is still required.

Clinical trial registration: ACTRN012607000293460 and ACTRN12607000292471 (Australian Clinical Trials Registry).

 
  • References

  • 1 Shaheen NJ, Richter JE. Barrett’s esophagus. Lancet 2009; 373: 850-861
  • 2 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
  • 3 Wassenaar EB, Oelschlager BK. Effect of medical and surgical treatment of Barrett’s metaplasia. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 3773-3779
  • 4 Spechler SJ, Sharma P, Souza RF et al. American Gastroenterological Association technical review on the management of Barrett’s esophagus. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: e18-52 ; quiz e13
  • 5 Bansal A, Kahrilas PJ. Treatment of GERD complications (Barrett’s, peptic stricture) and extra-esophageal syndromes. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2010; 24: 961-968
  • 6 Hudson M, Lin CL, Habr F. Current state of endoscopic therapies in Barrett’s esophagus and esophageal cancer. Hosp Pract (Minneap) 2011; 39: 170-180
  • 7 Li YM, Li L, Yu CH et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment for Barrett’s esophagus. Dig Dis Sci 2008; 53: 2837-2846
  • 8 Menon D, Stafinski T, Wu H et al. Endoscopic treatments for Barrett’s esophagus: a systematic review of safety and effectiveness compared to esophagectomy. BMC Gastroenterol 2010; 10: 111
  • 9 Ackroyd R, Tam W, Schoeman M et al. Prospective randomized controlled trial of argon plasma coagulation ablation vs. endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett’s esophagus after antireflux surgery. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 1-7
  • 10 Bright T, Watson DI, Tam W et al. Randomized trial of argon plasma coagulation versus endoscopic surveillance for Barrett’s esophagus after antireflux surgery: late results. Ann Surg 2007; 246: 1016-1020
  • 11 Bright T, Watson DI, Tam W et al. Prospective randomized trial of argon plasma coagulation ablation versus endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus in patients treated with antisecretory medication. Dig Dis Sci 2009; 54: 2606-2611
  • 12 Ferraris R, Fracchia M, Foti M et al. Barrett’s oesophagus: long-term follow-up after complete ablation argon plasma coagulation and the factors that determine its recurrence. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 25: 835-840
  • 13 Pinotti AC, Cecconello I, Filho FM et al. Endoscopic ablation of Barrett’s esophagus using argon plasma coagulation: a prospective study after fundoplication. Dis Esophagus 2004; 17: 243-246
  • 14 Morino M, Rebecchi F, Giaccone C et al. Endoscopic ablation of Barrett’s esophagus using argon plasma coagulation (APC) following surgical laparoscopic fundoplication. Surg Endosc 2003; 17: 539-542
  • 15 Sharma P, Wani S, Weston AP et al. A randomised controlled trial of ablation of Barrett’s oesophagus with multipolar electrocoagulation versus argon plasma coagulation in combination with acid suppression: long term results. Gut 2006; 55: 1233-1239
  • 16 Kauttu TM, Rantanen TK, Sihvo EI et al. Esophageal adenocarcinoma arising after antireflux surgery: a population-based analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 40: 1450-1454
  • 17 Lagergren J, Ye W, Lagergren P et al. The risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma after antireflux surgery. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 1297-1301
  • 18 Watson A, Heading RC, Shepherd NA. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s columnar-lined oesophagus. A Report of the Working Party of British Society of Gastroenterology. August 2005. Available at: http://www.bsg.org.uk/clinical-guidelines/oesophageal/guidelines-for-the-diagnosis-and-management-of-barrett-s-columnar-lined-oesophagus.html
  • 19 Bulsiewicz WJ, Shaheen NJ. The role of radiofrequency ablation in the management of Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Clin N Am 2011; 21: 95-109
  • 20 Ackroyd R, Kelty CJ, Brown NJ et al. Eradication of dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus using photodynamic therapy: long-term follow-up. Endoscopy 2003; 35: 496-501
  • 21 Ackroyd R, Brown NJ, Davis MF et al. Photodynamic therapy for dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus: a prospective, double blind, randomised, placebo controlled trial. Gut 2000; 47: 612-617
  • 22 Hage M, Siersema PD, van Dekken H et al. 5-aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy versus argon plasma coagulation for ablation of Barrett’s oesophagus: a randomised trial. Gut 2004; 53: 785-790
  • 23 Kelty C, Ackroyd R, Brown NJ et al. Endoscopic ablation of Barrett’s oesophagus: a randomized-controlled trial of photodynamic therapy vs. argon plasma coagulation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2004; 20: 1289-1296
  • 24 Fleischer DE, Overholt BF, Sharma VK et al. Endoscopic ablation of Barrett’s esophagus: a multicenter study with 2.5-year follow-up. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 867-876
  • 25 Vaccaro BJ, Gonzalez S, Poneros JM et al. Detection of intestinal metaplasia after successful eradication of Barrett’s esophagus with radiofrequency ablation. Dig Dis Sci 2011; 56: 1996-2000