Search

Background High-grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal carcinoma (IMC) in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) are now well-established indications for endoscopic resection (ER). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can be combined with ER in case of flat or long-segment BE ablation. We report here our experience of complementary RFA after widespread ER of neoplastic BE in daily practice. Method We retrospectively reviewed data of 89 patients, treated between 2006 and 2013 by ER alone (group 1) or by ER combined with RFA (group 2). Results Fifty-five patients in group 1 (7F/48M, mean age 68 years) underwent widespread ER with eradication of residual non-dysplastic BE. Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and intestinal metaplasia (IM) was achieved in 32/32 (100%) and 48/55 (87.3%) patients, respectively. Thirty-four patients in group 2 (3F/31M, mean age 67 years) had a multimodal treatment strategy, with widespread ER followed by RFA. Mean Prague classification of BE in this group was significantly longer (C4.4M6.6 vs. C2.7M4.5, P<0.001). Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and non-dysplastic BE was confirmed in 26/27 (96.3%) and 20/34 (58.8%) patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups concerning adverse events (16.4% vs. 23.5%, P=0.58) or recurrence rate of HGD/IMC (9.1% vs. 14.7%, P=0.42). The mismatch rate between preoperative and final histological diagnosis was high in both groups, at 45.5% and 26.5%. Conclusions A combination of ER and RFA can treat significantly longer neoplastic BE than ER alone, with the same efficiency and safety. Widespread ER, in contrast, is the only method of obtaining a reliable histological diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The long-term outcomes and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of sporadic duodenal adenoma (SDA), and the management of adverse events need to be confirmed. Methods A bicentric retrospective study was performed including all patients who underwent EMR for SDAs from 2003-2016. The primary aim was to evaluate the efficiency of EMR for SDA. The secondary objectives were to assess safety, recurrence management, predictive factors for treatment success, and adverse events. Results One hundred thirty patients (134 procedures) were included (median age 65 years, 49.3% male). The mean SDA size was 20.7 (range 5-50) mm. Of the SDAs, 58.2% were category 3 of the Vienna classification, 35.8% were category 4, and 5.9% were category 5. The median follow up was 25.0 (range 2-120) months. Complete mucosal resection was achieved for 129/134 lesions (96.2%), with en bloc resection in 59/134 (44%). Recurrence occurred in 28.6% of cases (30/105 procedures). Recurrence was successfully treated by new endoscopic procedures in 72.2% (13/18) and by surgery in 27.8% (5/18). Delayed bleeding occurred in 13.4% of cases (18/134) and was successfully managed endoscopically. The perforation rate was 3.7% (5/134); perforations were managed without surgery in 60% (3/5 patients) of cases. Conclusions Endoscopic treatment of SDA appears to be effective and relatively safe in tertiary centers. All bleeding complications were endoscopically controlled, and perforation was rare. Recurrence was frequent but could be managed endoscopically. EMR is confirmed as a first-line treatment in cases of SDA, and surgery is useful only if repeated EMRs fail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Currently, colonoscopy and polypectomy are the gold standard methods for the prevention of incident cases of colorectal cancer. The use of a new colonoscope (Fuse©, EndoChoice®) with a larger view of up to 330° appears to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We performed a prospective observational study concerning this scope. The primary endpoint was potentially omitted adenomas (POA), i.e. adenomas seen on the side screens that will not appear on the central display during colonoscopy withdrawal without oriented movements. Secondary endpoints included our ADR, Fuse® impact on ADR, time to cecal intubation and withdrawal time. Methods We performed a single-center prospective study in one French center. We enrolled patients over 18 years of age between January 2015 and March 2016. Results We included 141 patients; 3 were excluded because their colonoscopies were incomplete. Our study included 78 men and 60 women (sex ratio 1.3). The mean age was 60.4 years. A total of 130 polyps were resected. In all, 88/130 were adenomas (68%) and 34/88 adenomas (39%) were POA. The mean time to cecum was 10 min and the mean withdrawal time was 12 min. ADR was 35% for men and 31% for women. The estimated ADR without POA was 29% for men and 19% for women. Conclusions The Fuse® system appears to be safe and efficient. POA represented 39% of all adenomas. The impact of the panoramic view on the ADR was considered substantial. The main limitations are the lack of randomization and the absence of a control group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

stage of BE and includes the following: follow up, endotherapy with thermal ablation, and piecemeal or monobloc endoscopic resection (ER). We know that biopsies are unreliable in 20-75% of cases. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficiency of probe confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) in the diagnosis of the histological stage of BE, compared with the final histological results after ER. Methods This retrospective study was based on a prospective registry of patients referred for management of BE-associated dysplasia. The inclusion criteria were dysplasia associated with BE on pre-resection biopsy and endoscopic resection of the examined areas. CLE examinations (pCLEs) were performed using the Gastroflex® probe (Maunakea company). ER was sufficient to ensure that the target area was resected. The following four potential diagnoses were considered: normal or inflammatory mucosa, metaplasia (BE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (HGD/EAC). Results The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the detection of HGD/EAC were 92.9%, 71.4% and 80% for pCLE, and 78.6%, 61.9%, and 68.6% for histological biopsy, respectively. The differences in favor of pCLE were not statistically significant (P=0.2); however, in 13 patients with irregularities of the mucosa without elevated or depressed lesions (2 HGD/EAC and 11 non-HGD/EAC), pCLE led to positive redirection of therapy in 70% (9/13) of cases. Conclusion In the absence of visible lesions, pCLE appears to lead to correct diagnoses and to aid real-time decisions regarding therapeutic management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Strictures are frequent complications of large endoscopic mucosal resections (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissections of the esophagus. Local or systemic steroid therapy has shown promise in the prevention of secondary stenosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of systemic steroid therapy following endoscopic resection of at least hemicircumferential esophageal mucosa. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study in a tertiary center. We evaluated patients who were treated with oral steroids between July 2013 and September 2015, after undergoing a large EMR for Barrett's esophagus associated with dysplasia or carcinoma. The steroid protocol used was an initial dose of 30 mg prednisolone, tapered over 8 weeks. Exclusion criteria were a previous attempt at radiofrequency ablation or resection. Results: Thirty-one patients (27 men) were analyzed: 13 with low-grade dysplasia Barrett's esophagus, 16 with in situ adenocarcinoma, 1 with pT1SM1 adenocarcinoma, and 1 with pT1SM2 adenocarcinoma. Twenty-eight resections (28/31) were completed (R0) in 1-3 sessions (median 2), while 3 resections were R1. The median length of Barrett's esophagus was C3M5 (range C0M2-C10M11) according to the Prague classification. The median follow up was 10 months (range 4-17), during which 4 patients (13%) developed a secondary stenosis. All stenoses were successfully treated by endoscopic dilation (range 1-4). No complications related to dilation or to the steroid therapy were observed. Conclusions Our rate of secondary stricture was lower than expected, given the rates of 17-88% in published studies. Systemic oral steroid therapy seems to be effective in reducing potential esophageal stenosis after EMR. Complementary randomized studies are required to confirm whether systemic steroids are an effective primary prophylaxis for esophageal stenosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]