Search

Abstract Background and Aim Barrett's esophagus is associated with increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. The optimal management of low‐grade dysplasia arising in Barrett's esophagus remains controversial. We performed a retrospective study from a tertiary referral center for Barrett's esophagus neoplasia, to estimate time to progression to high‐grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with confirmed low‐grade dysplasia compared with those with downstaged low‐grade dysplasia from index presentation and referral. We analyzed risk factors for progression. Methods We analyzed consecutive patients with low‐grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus referred to a single tertiary center (July 2006–October 2018). Biopsies were reviewed by at least two expert pathologists. Results One hundred and forty‐seven patients referred with suspected low‐grade dysplasia were included. Forty‐two of 133 (32%) of all external referrals had confirmed low‐grade dysplasia after expert histopathology review. Multivariable analysis showed nodularity at index endoscopy (P

La Clasificación de Chicago v4.0 (CCv4.0) es el esquema actualizado para clasificar las alteraciones de la motilidad esofágica utilizando la métrica de la manometría de alta resolución (HRM). Para desarrollar la CCv4.0, 52 expertos internacionales diversos separados en siete subgrupos de trabajo utilizaron una metodología formalmente validada, en un periodo de dos años. Las actualizaciones claves de la CCv4.0 consisten en un protocolo de HRM más riguroso y expansivo que incorpora las posiciones en decúbito supino y sedestación, así como pruebas provocadoras; una definición refinada de la obstrucción del flujo de salida de la unión esofagogástrica (EGJOO), criterios diagnósticos más estrictos para la motilidad esofágica inefectiva, y descripción de la métrica basal de la EGJ. Adicionalmente, la CCv4.0 se propuso definir el diagnóstico de alteración de la motilidad como conclusivo o no conclusivo con base en los síntomas asociados, los hallazgos en las pruebas provocadoras, y los resultados de los exámenes de apoyo como el esofagograma con tableta de bario y/o la prueba con sonda para imagen endoluminal funcional. Estos cambios buscan minimizar la ambigüedad presente en iteraciones previas de la Clasificación de Chicago; además proveen criterios más estandarizados y rigurosos para los patrones de alteración de la peristalsis y obstrucción de la EGJ.

Achalasia is a rare esophageal motility disorder characterized by the incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and impaired peristaltic activity. The advent of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and the rapidly evolving role of therapeutic endoscopy have revolutionized the approach to the diagnosis and management of achalasia patients in the last decade. With advances in HRM technology and methodology, fluoroscopy and EndoFlip, achalasia can be differentiated into therapeutically meaningful phenotypes with a high degree of accuracy. Further, the newest treatment option, per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), has become a staple therapy following the last 10 years of experience, and recent randomized trials appear to show no difference between POEM, graded pneumatic dilatation and surgical Heller myotomy in terms of short- and long-term efficacy or complication rate. On the other hand, how treatment outcomes are measured as well as the risk of reflux following therapy remain areas of contention. This review aims to summarize the recent advancements in achalasia testing and therapy, describes the recent randomized clinical trials as well as their potential setbacks, and touches on the future of personalizing achalasia treatment.

Background and study aims Cryoablation with the Cryoballoon device is a novel ablative therapy that uses cycles of freezing and thawing to induce cell death. This single-center prospective study evaluated the feasibility of the focal cryoablation device for the treatment of areas of refractory esophageal neoplasia in patients who had undergone first line endoscopic eradication therapy (EET). Complete remission of dysplasia (CR-D) and complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) at first follow-up endoscopy, durability of disease reversal, rates of stenosis and adverse events were studied. Patients and methods Eighteen cases were treated. At baseline, nine patients had low-grade dysplasia (LGD), six had high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and three had intramucosal carcinoma (IMC). Median length of dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus (BE) treated was 3 cm. The median number of ablations per patient was 11. Each selected area of visible dysplasia received 10 seconds of ablation. One session of cryoablation was performed per patient. Biopsies were performed at around 3 months post-ablation. Results CR-D was achieved in 78 % and CR-IM in 39 % of patients. There were no device malfunction or adverse events. Stenosis was noted in 11 % of cases. At a median follow up of 19-months, CR-D was maintained in 72 % of patients and CR-IM in 33 %. Conclusions Cryoablation appears to be a viable rescue strategy in patients with refractory neoplasia. It is well tolerated and successful in obtaining CR-D and CR-IM in patients with treatment-refractory BE. Further trials of dosimetry, efficacy and safety in treatment-naïve patients are underway.

Summary: Background: Screening for Barrett's oesophagus relies on endoscopy, which is invasive and few who undergo the procedure are found to have the condition. We aimed to use machine learning techniques to develop and externally validate a simple risk prediction panel to screen individuals for Barrett's oesophagus. Methods: In this prospective study, machine learning risk prediction in Barrett's oesophagus (MARK-BE), we used data from two case-control studies, BEST2 and BOOST, to compile training and validation datasets. From the BEST2 study, we analysed questionnaires from 1299 patients, of whom 880 (67·7%) had Barrett's oesophagus, including 40 with invasive oesophageal adenocarcinoma, and 419 (32·3%) were controls. We randomly split (6:4) the cohort using a computer algorithm into a training dataset of 776 patients and a testing dataset of 523 patients. We compiled an external validation cohort from the BOOST study, which included 398 patients, comprising 198 patients with Barrett's oesophagus (23 with oesophageal adenocarcinoma) and 200 controls. We identified independently important diagnostic features of Barrett's oesophagus using the machine learning techniques information gain and correlation-based feature selection. We assessed multiple classification tools to create a multivariable risk prediction model. Internal validation of the model using the BEST2 testing dataset was followed by external validation using the BOOST external validation dataset. From these data we created a prediction panel to identify at-risk individuals. Findings: The BEST2 study included 40 diagnostic features. Of these, 19 added information gain but after correlation-based feature selection only eight showed independent diagnostic value including age, sex, cigarette smoking, waist circumference, frequency of stomach pain, duration of heartburn and acidic taste, and taking antireflux medication, of which all were associated with increased risk of Barrett's oesophagus, except frequency of stomach pain, with was inversely associated in a case-control population. Logistic regression offered the highest prediction quality with an area under the receiver-operator curve (AUC) of 0·87 (95% CI 0·84–0·90; sensitivity set at 90%; specificity of 68%). In the testing dataset, AUC was 0·86 (0·83–0·89; sensitivity set at 90%; specificity of 65%). In the external validation dataset, the AUC was 0·81 (0·74–0·84; sensitivity set at 90%; specificity of 58%). Interpretation: Our diagnostic model offers valid predictions of diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus in patients with symptomatic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, assisting in identifying who should go forward to invasive confirmatory testing. Our predictive panel suggests that overweight men who have been taking antireflux medication for a long time might merit particular consideration for further testing. Our risk prediction panel is quick and simple to administer but will need further calibration and validation in a prospective study in primary care. Funding: Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust and Guts UK.