Potential benefits of one­time gastroscopy in search for precancerous conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Precancerous conditions for esophageal (EA) and gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) are Barrett's esophagus (BE) and atrophic gastritis (AG), respectively. Their surveillance is crucial for the detection of early lesions. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to assess whether one­timeesophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in search for precancerous conditions would be effective in the population with low­to­moderate esophageal and gastric cancer risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 5984 individuals who underwent diagnostic EGD in 3 endoscopic centers, from March 2018 to October 2019, were analyzed to assess the age of occurrence of precancerous conditions and cancers. Age distribution of the patients with malignant gastric and esophageal tumors registered in the national cancer registry from 2014 to 2017 was analyzed. RESULTS: In comparison with individuals below 40 years old, the risk of EA and GA diagnosis increased at the age of 60 to 64 years (odds ratio [OR], 12.1; 95% CI, 1.5-98.6), gastric and esophageal dysplasia at the age of 55 to 59 years (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.3-9.7), and BE and AG at the age of 40 to 44 years (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.04-2.4). The number of procedures per 1 cancer that could be potentially avoided was 236, 235, 290, 360, 394, and 344 for the age groups of 40-44 years, 45-49 years, 50-54 years, 55-59 years, 60-64 years, and 65-69 years, respectively. The assessed potential benefit­to­harm ratio was 47, 38, 31, 28, and 32 for the age groups of 40-49 years, 50-54 years, 55-59 years, 60-64 years, and 65-69 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: One­time EGD in search for precancerous conditions could be potentially applicable in individuals between 40 and 69 years of age.

Heterotopic Gastric Mucosa in the Proximal Esophagus: Prospective Study and Systematic Review on Relationships with Endoscopic Findings and Clinical Data.

Cervical inlet patches (CIP) are common endoscopic findings with uncertain pathogenesis and clinical significance. We aimed to perform a systematic review and prospective study of clinical data and endoscopic findings related to CIP. It was a prospective single-center study conducted between 10/01/2017 and 9/01/2018. Forty patients with histopathologically confirmed CIP were compared with 222 individuals in the reference group. The systematic review was executed in accordance with the PRISMA guideline. Alcohol consumption tended to be higher among patients with CIP (3.0 ± 4.6 vs. 1.9 ± 5.0 standard drinks/week CIP patients and reference group, respectively; p < 0.001). Dysphagia was more frequent among patients with CIP (25% vs. 1.4%, CIP patients and reference group, respectively; p < 0.001), and sore throat and hoarseness were less frequent in patients with CIP (17.5% vs. 26.6% CIP patients and reference group, respectively; p < 0.01). In the multivariate regression analysis, the only risk factor of CIP occurrence was dysphagia (OR 21.9, 95%CI 4.9-98.6; p < 0.001). Sore throat and hoarseness were a reverse-risk factor of CIP diagnosis (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1-0.93; p = 0.04). Clinical data and coexisting endoscopic findings were not related to CIP. In the presented study, dysphagia was related to CIP occurrence, and sore throat and hoarseness tended to be less frequent among patients with CIP.

The role of endoscopic and demographic features in the diagnosis of gastric precancerous conditions.

INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of atrophic gastritis (AG) and intestinal metaplasia (IM) is a crucial screening and surveillance strategy for gastric adenocarcinoma. OBJECTIVES: The main objective was to assess the performance of endoscopic diagnosis of gastric precancerous conditions in a real­life scenario. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 2099 gastroscopies with biopsy to evaluate gastritis performed in 3 endoscopic centers from March 2018 to October 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Endoscopic data regarding gastritis, atrophy, and intestinal metaplasia were compared with histopathological reports. RESULTS: The endoscopic diagnosis sensitivity was 69.5% for AG and 19.4% for IM. The specificity of endoscopic detection of AG was 69.5% and of IM, 97.9%. The endoscopic detection of gastritis was a risk factor for AG and IM diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 5.1; 95% CI, 1.9-14.1 and OR, 14.5; 95% CI, 5.9-35.8, respectively) and the patient's age was a risk factor for AG, IM, dysplasia, and advanced stage of AG (ASAG) diagnosis (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.04-1.06; OR, 1.035; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04; OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06; and OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.09, respectively). The age threshold of 45 or 40 years with endoscopically diagnosed gastritis for obtaining biopsy would result in 96.3% and 95% ASAG or dysplasia diagnosis sensitivity, and in the reduction of the number of biopsies by 20.2% and 20.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The application of the age threshold with or without an endoscopic diagnosis of gastritis could reduce the number of mapping biopsies to detect advanced stages of atrophic gastritis or dysplasia with high sensitivity.

Composite detection rate as an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy quality measure correlating with detection of neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is commonly used diagnostic method with no widely accepted quality measure. We assessed quality indicator-composite detection rate (CDR)-consisting of detection of at least one of the following: cervical inlet patch, gastric polyp and post-ulcer duodenal bulb deformation. The aim of the study was to validate CDR according to detection rate of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms (UGN). METHODS: It was a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted from January 2019 to October 2019. The endoscopic reports from 2896 symptomatic patients who underwent diagnostic EGD were analyzed. The EGDs were performed in three endoscopy units located in tertiary university hospital, private outpatient clinic and local hospital. RESULTS: 64 UGNs were detected. The mean CDR was 21.9%. The CDR correlated with UGN detection rate (R = 0.49, p = 0.045). Based on CDR quartiles, operators were divided into group 1 with CDR < 10%, group 2 with CDR 10-17%, group 3 with CDR 17.1-26%, and group 4 with CDR > 26%. Detection rate of UGN was significantly higher in the group 4 in comparison to group 1 (OR 4.4; 95% CI 2.2 - 9.0). In the multivariate regression model, patient age, male gender and operator's CDR > 26% were independent risk factors of UGN detection (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.01 - 1.05, OR 2; 95% CI 1.2 - 3.5, and OR 5.7 95% CI 1.5 - 22.3, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The CDR is associated with the detection of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms. This parameter may be a useful quality measure of EGD to be applied in general setting.