Search

Background Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is established as first-choice treatment for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) worldwide, most data are derived from Asian studies. We aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of ESD for patients with early ESCC in a Western cohort. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, patients with early ESCC amenable to ESD were included from four tertiary referral hospitals in the Netherlands between 2012 and 2017. All ESD procedures were performed by experienced endoscopists, after which the decision for additional treatment was made on a per-patient basis. Outcomes were curative resection rate, ESCC-specific survival, and overall survival. Results Of 68 included patients (mean age 69 years; 34 males), ESD was technically successful in 66 (97%; 95%CI 93%–100%), with curative resection achieved in 34/66 (52%; 95%CI 39%–64%). Among patients with noncurative resection, 15/32 (47%) underwent additional treatment, mainly esophagectomy (n = 10) or definitive chemoradiation therapy (n = 4). Endoscopic surveillance was preferred in 17/32 patients (53%), based on severe comorbidities or patient choice. Overall, 31/66 patients (47%) died during a median follow-up of 66 months; 8/31 (26%) were ESCC-related deaths. The 5-year overall and ESCC-specific survival probabilities were 62% (95%CI 52%–75%) and 86% (95%CI 77%–96%), respectively. Conclusion In this Western cohort with long-term follow-up, the effectiveness and safety of ESD for early ESCC was confirmed, although the rate of noncurative resections was substantial. Irrespective of curative status, the long-term prognosis of these patients was limited mainly due to competing mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endoscopic resection is the cornerstone of endoscopic management of esophageal early neoplasia. However, endoscopic resection is a complex technique requiring knowledge and expertise. Our aims were to identify the most important learning points in performing endoscopic resection in a training setting and to provide information on how to improve endoscopic resection technique.Methods: Six gastroenterologists at centers with multidisciplinary expertise in upper gastrointestinal oncology participated in a structured endoscopic resection training program, consisting of four training days with lectures and hands-on training on live pigs, further one-to-one hands-on training days, and written feedback (by an expert) on videos of unsupervised endoscopic resection procedures. The first 20 endoscopic resections of each participant were prospectively registered. Ninety learning points were independently identified by participants using a standardized questionnaire and by an expert providing written feedback on 33 unsupervised endoscopic resection videos. Three expert endoscopists selected and ranked the most important learning points in a consensus meeting. Results. The top 10 tips (illustrated by unique videos of three perforations) were: (1) allow time for inspection and use a high-definition endoscope; (2) create a preprocedural plan by placing electrocoagulation markings; (3) know the management of bleeding; (4) optimize the endoscopic view by repeatedly cleaning out stomach and target area; (5) use a therapeutic endoscope during resection; (6) always perform a test suction; (7) keep instruments close to the tip; (8) lift edges in piecemeal endoscopic cap resections; (9) know the management of perforation; (10) pin specimens down.Conclusions: This study summarized the most important learning points for performing endoscopic resection encountered during a structured endoscopic resection training program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:  This study evaluated the proportion of patients with residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection (ER) for Barrett's neoplasia with confirmed tumor-positive vertical resection margin (R1v)., Methods:  This retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing ER for Barrett's neoplasia with histologically documented R1v since 2008 in the Dutch Barrett Expert Centers. We defined R1v as cancer cells touching vertical resection margins and Rx as nonassessable margins. Reassessment of R1v specimens was performed by experienced pathologists until consensus was reached regarding vertical margins., Results:  101/110 included patients had macroscopically complete resections (17 T1a, 84 T1b), and 99/101 (98%) ER specimens were histologically reassessed, with R1v confirmed in 74 patients (75%), Rx in 16%, and R0 in 9%. Presence/absence of residual neoplasia could be assessed in 66/74 patients during endoscopic reassessment (52) and/or in the surgical resection specimen (14), and 33/66 (50%) had residual neoplasia. Residual neoplasia detected during endoscopy was always endoscopically visible and biopsies from a normal-appearing ER scar did not detect additional neoplasia. Of 25 patients who underwent endoscopic follow-up (median 37 months [interquartile range 12-50]), 4 developed local recurrence (16.0%), all detected as visible abnormalities., Conclusions:  After ER with R1v, 50% of patients had no residual neoplasia. Histological evaluation of ER margins appears challenging, as in this study 75% of documented R1v cases were confirmed during reassessment. Endoscopic reassessment 8-12 weeks after ER seems to accurately detect residual neoplasia and can help to determine the most appropriate strategy for patients with R1v., Competing Interests: B.L.A.M. Weusten has received financial research support from Pentax Medical and Aqua Medical, and has received lecture fees from and is a consultant for Pentax Medical. J.J.G.H.M. Bergman has received financial support for institutional review board-approved research from C2Therapeutics/Pentax Medical, Medtronic, and Aqua Medical. R.E Pouw is a consultant for Medtronic BV and MicroTech Europe, and has received speaker fees from Pentax. L. van Tilburg, E.P.D. Verheij, S.E.M. van de Ven, S.N. van Munster, L. Alvarez Herrero, W.B. Nagengast, E.J. Schoon, A. Alkhalaf, L. Oudijk, S.L. Meijer, M. Jansen, M. Doukas, and A.D. Koch declare that they have no conflict of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).)

Background & Aims: Follow-up (FU) strategies after endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for Barrett's neoplasia do not consider the risk of mortality from causes other than esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to evaluate this risk during long-term FU, and to assess whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) can predict mortality., Methods: We included all patients with successful EET from the nationwide Barrett registry in the Netherlands. Data were merged with National Statistics for accurate mortality data. We evaluated annual mortality rates (AMRs, per 1000 person-years) and standardized mortality ratio for other-cause mortality. Performance of the CCI was evaluated by discrimination and calibration., Results: We included 1154 patients with a mean age of 64 years (±9). During median 59 months (p25-p75 37-91; total 6375 person-years), 154 patients (13%) died from other causes than EAC (AMR, 24.1; 95% CI, 20.5-28.2), most commonly non-EAC cancers (n = 58), cardiovascular (n = 31), or pulmonary diseases (n = 26). Four patients died from recurrent EAC (AMR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-1.4). Compared with the general Dutch population, mortality was significantly increased for patients in the lowest 3 age quartiles (ie, age <71 years). Validation of CCI in our population showed good discrimination (Concordance statistic, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84) and fair calibration., Conclusion: The other-cause mortality risk after successful EET was more than 40 times higher (48; 95% CI, 15-99) than the risk of EAC-related mortality. Our findings reveal that younger post-EET patients exhibit a significantly reduced life expectancy when compared with the general population. Furthermore, they emphasize the strong predictive ability of CCI for long-term mortality after EET. This straightforward scoring system can inform decisions regarding personalized FU, including appropriate cessation timing. (NL7039)., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA)±endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred treatment for early neoplasia in Barrett's oesophagus (BE). We aimed to report short-term and long-term outcomes for all 1384 patients treated in the Netherlands (NL) from 2008 to 2018, with uniform treatment and follow-up (FU) in a centralised setting., Design: Endoscopic therapy for early BE neoplasia in NL is centralised in nine expert centres with specifically trained endoscopists and pathologists that adhere to a joint protocol. Prospectively collected data are registered in a uniform database. Patients with low/high-grade dysplasia or low-risk cancer, were treated by ER of visible lesions followed by trimonthly RFA sessions of any residual BE until complete eradication of BE (CE-BE). Patients with ER alone were not included., Results: After ER (62% of cases; 43% low-risk cancers) and median 1 circumferential and 2 focal RFA (p25-p75 0-1; 1-2) per patient, CE-BE was achieved in 94% (1270/1348). Adverse events occurred in 21% (268/1386), most commonly oesophageal stenosis (15%), all were managed endoscopically. A total of 1154 patients with CE-BE were analysed for long-term outcomes. During median 43 months (22-69) and 4 endoscopies (1-5), 38 patients developed dysplastic recurrence (3%, annual recurrence risk 1%), all were detected as endoscopically visible abnormalities. Random biopsies from a normal appearing cardia showed intestinal metaplasia (IM) in 14% and neoplasia in 0%. A finding of IM in the cardia was reproduced during further FU in only 33%, none progressed to neoplasia. Frequent FU visits in the first year of FU were not associated with recurrence risk., Conclusion: In a setting of centralised care, RFA±ER is effective for eradication of Barrett's related neoplasia and has remarkably low rates of dysplastic recurrence. Our data support more lenient FU intervals, with emphasis on careful endoscopic inspection. Random biopsies from neosquamous epithelium and cardia are of questionable value., Netherlands Trial Register Number: NL7039., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SvM, EN, AH, AB, AA, BES, EJS, WC, ADK, SEMvdV, PJFdJ, TJT, WBN, FTMP, JW, MHMGH, REP declared to have no disclosures relevant to this manuscript. BLAMW received financial support for IRB-approved research from C2Therapeutics/Pentax Medical. JJGHMB received financial support for IRB-approved research from C2Therapeutics/Pentax Medical, Medtronic, and Aqua Medical., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Aims: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is accompanied by an increased risk of developing esophageal cancer. Accurate risk-stratification is warranted to improve endoscopic surveillance. Most data available on risk factors is derived from tertiary care centers or from cohorts with limited surveillance time or surveillance quality. The aim of this study was to assess endoscopic and clinical risk factors for progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in a large prospective cohort of BE patients from community hospitals supported by an overarching infrastructure to ensure optimal surveillance quality., Methods: A well-defined prospective multicenter cohort study was initiated in six community hospitals in the Amsterdam region in 2003. BE patients were identified by PALGA search and included in a prospective surveillance program with a single endoscopist performing all endoscopies at each hospital. Planning and data collection was performed by experienced research nurses who attended all endoscopies. Endpoint was progression to HGD/EAC., Results: Nine hundred eighty-five patients were included for analysis. During median follow-up of 7.9 years (IQR 4.1-12.5) 67 patients were diagnosed with HGD (n = 28) or EAC (n = 39), progression rate 0.78% per patient-year. As a clinical risk factor age at time of endoscopy was associated with neoplastic progression (HR 1.05; 95% CI 1.03-1.08). Maximum Barrett length and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) at baseline were endoscopic predictors of progression (HR 1.15; 95% CI 1.09-1.21 and HR 2.36; 95% CI 1.29-4.33)., Conclusion: Risk of progression to HGD/EAC in a large, prospective, community-based Barrett's cohort was low. Barrett's length, LGD and age were important risk factors for progression. (www.trialregister.nl NTR1789)., (© 2021 The Authors. United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.)

Background and Aims: Volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE) is an advanced imaging modality used to detect Barrett's esophagus (BE) dysplasia. However, real-time interpretation of VLE scans is complex and time-consuming. Computer-aided detection (CAD) may help in the process of VLE image interpretation. Our aim was to train and validate a CAD algorithm for VLE-based detection of BE neoplasia., Methods: The multicenter, VLE PREDICT study, prospectively enrolled 47 patients with BE. In total, 229 nondysplastic BE and 89 neoplastic (high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma) targets were laser marked under VLE guidance and subsequently underwent a biopsy for histologic diagnosis. Deep convolutional neural networks were used to construct a CAD algorithm for differentiation between nondysplastic and neoplastic BE tissue. The CAD algorithm was trained on a set consisting of the first 22 patients (134 nondysplastic BE and 38 neoplastic targets) and validated on a separate test set from patients 23 to 47 (95 nondysplastic BE and 51 neoplastic targets). The performance of the algorithm was benchmarked against the performance of 10 VLE experts., Results: Using the training set to construct the algorithm resulted in an accuracy of 92%, sensitivity of 95%, and specificity of 92%. When performance was assessed on the test set, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 85%, 91%, and 82%, respectively. The algorithm outperformed all 10 VLE experts, who demonstrated an overall accuracy of 77%, sensitivity of 70%, and specificity of 81%., Conclusions: We developed, validated, and benchmarked a VLE CAD algorithm for detection of BE neoplasia using prospectively collected and biopsy-correlated VLE targets. The algorithm detected neoplasia with high accuracy and outperformed 10 VLE experts. (The Netherlands National Trials Registry (NTR) number: NTR 6728.)., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The histopathological diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's oesophagus (BO) is associated with poor interobserver agreement and guidelines dictate expert review. To facilitate nationwide expert review in the Netherlands, a web-based digital review panel has been set up, which currently consists of eight 'core' pathologists. The aim of this study was to evaluate if other pathologists from the Dutch BO expert centres qualify for the expert panel by assessing their performance in 80 consecutive LGD reviews submitted to the panel., Methods: Pathologists independently assessed digital slides in two phases. Both phases consisted of 40 cases, with a group discussion after phase I. For all cases, a previous consensus diagnosis made by five core pathologists was available, which was used as reference. The following criteria were used: (1) percentage of 'indefinite for dysplasia' diagnoses, (2) percentage agreement with consensus diagnosis and (3) proportion of cases with a consensus diagnosis of dysplasia underdiagnosed as non-dysplastic. Benchmarks were based on scores of the core pathologists., Results: After phase I, 1/7 pathologists met the benchmark score for all quality criteria, yet three pathologists only marginally failed the agreement with consensus diagnosis (score 68.3%, benchmark 69%). After a group discussion and phase II, 5/6 remaining aspirant panel members qualified with all scores within the benchmark range., Conclusions: The Dutch BO review panel now consists of 14 pathologists, who-after structured assessments and group discussions-can be considered homogeneous in their review of biopsies with LGD., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: An automated risk prediction assay has previously been shown to objectively identify patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) who are at increased risk of malignant progression. To evaluate the predictive performance of the assay in 76 patients with NDBE of which 38 progressed to high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (progressors) and 38 did not (nonprogressors) and to determine whether assessment of additional (spatial) levels per endoscopy and/or multiple (temporal) time points improves assay performance., Methods: In a blinded, nested case-control cohort, progressors and nonprogressors were matched (age, sex, and Barrett's esophagus length). All random biopsy levels from the baseline endoscopy (spatial samples) and all available previous endoscopies back to 10 years before progression (temporal samples) were assayed. Because the 1:1 ratio of progressors to nonprogressors does not reflect the real-world Barrett's population, negative and positive predictive values were adjusted for prevalence., Results: Seventy-six patients (58 men), mean age of 63 ± 9 years, were studied. A high-risk score was associated with a prevalence-adjusted annual progression rate of 6.9%. The assay identified 31% of progressors when assessing a single biopsy level from the baseline endoscopy. Sensitivity increased to 50% and 69% in spatial and temporal analyses, respectively, while specificity remained at 95%., Discussion: The assay identified a significant subset of NDBE patients who progress at a rate comparable with published estimates for expert-confirmed low-grade dysplasia. Assessing additional spatial and temporal biopsies increased the predictive accuracy, allowing for identification of most future progressors. Additional studies will evaluate the predictive performance of the assay in low-prevalence settings.

Background and Aims: Endoscopic recognition of early Barrett's neoplasia is challenging. Blue-light imaging (BLI) and linked-color imaging (LCI) may assist endoscopists in appreciation of neoplasia. Our aim was to evaluate BLI and LCI for visualization of Barrett's neoplasia in comparison with white-light endoscopy (WLE) alone, when assessed by nonexpert endoscopists., Methods: In this web-based assessment, corresponding WLE, BLI, and LCI images of 30 neoplastic Barrett's lesions were delineated by 3 expert endoscopists to establish ground truth. These images were then scored and delineated by 76 nonexpert endoscopists from 3 countries and with different levels of expertise, in 4 separate assessment phases with a washout period of 2 weeks. Assessments were as follows: assessment 1, WLE only; assessment 2, WLE + BLI; assessment 3, WLE + LCI; assessment 4, WLE + BLI + LCI. The outcomes were (1) appreciation of macroscopic appearance and ability to delineate lesions (visual analog scale [VAS] scores); (2) preferred technique (ordinal scores); and (3) assessors' delineation performance in terms of overlap with expert ground truth., Results: Median VAS scores for phases 2 to 4 were significantly higher than in phase 1 (P < .001). Assessors preferred BLI and LCI over WLE for appreciation of macroscopic appearance (P < .001) and delineation (P < .001). Linear mixed-effect models showed that delineation performance increased significantly in phase 4., Conclusions: The use of BLI and LCI has significant additional value for the visualization of Barrett's neoplasia when used by nonexpert endoscopists. Assessors appreciated the addition of BLI and LCI better than the use of WLE alone. Furthermore, this addition led to improved delineation performance, thereby allowing for better acquisition of targeted biopsy samples. (The Netherlands Trial Registry number: NL7541.)., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The currently recommended regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus (BE) comprises 2 applications of energy, cleaning of the device and ablation zone, and 2 additional applications of energy. A simplified regimen may be of clinical utility if it is faster, easier, and equally safe and effective., Objective: To compare the efficacy of 2 focal RFA regimens., Setting: Three tertiary referral centers., Patients: Consecutive patients scheduled for focal RFA of BE with flat type BE with at least 2 BE islands or mosaic groups of islands were enrolled., Interventions: BE areas were paired: 1 area was randomized to the "standard" regimen (2 × 15 J/cm(2)-clean-2 × 15 J/cm(2)) or to the "simplified" regimen (3 × 15 J/cm(2)-no clean), allocating the second area automatically to the other regimen. The percentage of surface area regression of each area was scored at 2 months by the endoscopist (blinded)., Outcome Measure: Proportion of completely removed BE areas at 2 months. Calculated sample size was 46 pairs of BE areas using a noninferiority design. Noninferiority was defined as <20% difference in the paired proportions., Results: Forty-five equivalent pairs of BE areas were included in 41 patients. The proportion of completely removed BE areas at 2 months after focal RFA was 30 (67%) for standard and 33 (73%) for simplified. Noninferiority was demonstrated by a 7% difference (95% CI, -10.6 to +20.9)., Limitations: Tertiary referral centers., Conclusions: The results of this multicenter randomized trial suggest that a simplified 3 × 15 J/cm(2) focal ablation regimen is not inferior to the standard regimen, regarding the endoscopic removal of residual Barrett islands., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with or without endoscopic resection effectively eradicates Barrett's esophagus (BE) containing high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and/or early-stage cancer. We followed patients who received RFA for BE containing high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and/or early-stage cancer for 5 years to determine the durability of treatment response., Methods: We followed 54 patients with BE (2-12 cm), previously enrolled in 4 consecutive cohort studies in which they underwent focal endoscopic resection in case of visible lesions (n = 40 [72%]), followed by serial RFA every 3 months. Patients underwent high-resolution endoscopy with narrow-band imaging at 6 and 12 months after treatment and then annually for 5 years (median, 61 months; interquartile range, 53-65 months); random biopsy samples were collected from neosquamous epithelium and gastric cardia. After 5 years, endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic resection of neosquamous epithelium were performed. Outcomes included sustained complete remission of neoplasia or intestinal metaplasia (IM), IM in gastric cardia, or buried glands in neosquamous epithelium., Results: After 5 years, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed sustained complete remission of neoplasia and intestinal metaplasia in 90% of patients; neoplasia recurred in 3 patients and was managed endoscopically. Focal IM in the cardia was found in 19 of 54 patients (35%), in 53 of 1143 gastric cardia biopsies (4.6%). The incidence of IM of the cardia did not increase over time; and IM was diagnosed based on only a single biopsy in 89% of patients. Buried glands were detected in 3 of 3543 neosquamous epithelium biopsies (0.08%, from 3 patients). No endoscopic resection samples had buried glands., Conclusions: Among patients who have undergone RFA with or without endoscopic resection for neoplastic BE, 90% remain in remission at 5-year follow-up, with all recurrences managed endoscopically. This treatment approach is therefore an effective and durable alternative to esophagectomy; www.trialregister.nl number, NTR2938., (Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)