Simultaneous use of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is not safe in an esophageal porcine model.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is safe and effective for eradication of Barrett's esophagus after endoscopic resection (ER) of neoplasia. Widespread ER, however, is likely to induce stenosis, hampering subsequent circumferential RFA. A 'single step' procedure with ER and circumferential RFA in the same session may avoid this problem. Two variants are possible: circumferential RFA of Barrett's esophagus including the lesion followed by ER of the ablated lesion ('RFA→ER'), or ER of the lesion directly followed by circumferential RFA of remaining Barrett's esophagus including the resection wound ('ER→RFA'). First aim was to evaluate perforation risk of 'ER→RFA' using increasing RFA energies. Second aim was to compare stenosis rate after 'ER→RFA' versus 'RFA→ER'. In Experiment 1, 24 areas in six pigs underwent widespread ER directly followed by circumferential RFA with increasing energies (2 x 10, 2 x 12-6 x 12 J/cm(2)) in the esophagus. In Experiment 2, eight pigs each had four treatment areas randomized: 'ER→RFA', RFA alone, ER alone, and 'RFA→ER'. No acute perforations occurred when ablating ER wounds. Two delayed perforations occurred: one in experiment 1, another in experiment n2 at the 'ER→RFA' area. The remaining seven pigs in experiment 2 showed stenosis in all 'ER→RFA' and 'RFA→ER' areas versus 5/7 RFA alone areas, and 0/7 ER alone areas. In conclusion, the 'single step' variant 'ER→RFA' is not safe in this porcine model and seems therefore not ethical to evaluate in humans at this stage. Given the high rate of stenosis after 'RFA→ER' and RFA alone, one might question the validity of the porcine model for this type of experiments.

Predictive factors for initial treatment response after circumferential radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's esophagus with early neoplasia: a prospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is safe and effective for the eradication of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus; however, occasionally there is minimal regression after initial circumferential balloon-based RFA (c-RFA). This study aimed to identify predictive factors for a poor response 3 months after c-RFA, and to relate the percentage regression at 3 months to the final treatment outcome. METHODS: We included consecutive patients from 14 centers who underwent c-RFA for high grade dysplasia at worst. Patient and treatment characteristics were registered prospectively. "Poor initial response" was defined as < 50 % regression of the Barrett's esophagus 3 months after c-RFA, graded by two expert endoscopists using endoscopic images. Predictors of initial response were identified through logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: There were 278 patients included (median Barrett's segment C4M6). In poor initial responders (n = 36; 13 %), complete response for neoplasia (CR-neoplasia) was ultimately achieved in 86 % (vs. 98 % in good responders; P < 0.01) and complete response for intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) in 66 % (vs. 95 %; P < 0.01). Poor responders required 13 months treatment (vs. 7 months; P < 0.01) for a median of four RFA sessions (vs. three; P < 0.01). We identified four independent baseline predictors of poor response: active reflux esophagitis (odds ratio [OR] 37.4; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 3.2 - 433.2); endoscopic resection scar regeneration with Barrett's epithelium (OR 4.7; 95 %CI 1.1 - 20.0); esophageal narrowing pre-RFA (OR 3.9; 95 %CI 1.0 - 15.1); and years of neoplasia pre-RFA (OR 1.2; 95 %CI 1.0 - 1.4). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a poor initial response to c-RFA have a lower ultimate success rate for CR-neoplasia/CR-IM, require more treatment sessions, and a longer treatment period. A poor initial response to c-RFA occurs more frequently in patients who regenerate their endoscopic resection scar with Barrett's epithelium, and those with ongoing reflux esophagitis, neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus for a longer time, or a narrow esophagus.

Radiofrequency ablation and endoscopic resection in a single session for Barrett's esophagus containing early neoplasia: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Endoscopic resection with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) 6 weeks later safely and effectively eradicates Barrett's esophagus with high grade dysplasia (HGD) and early cancer. After widespread endoscopic resection, related scarring may hamper balloon-based circumferential RFA (c-RFA). However c-RFA immediately followed by endoscopic resection in the same session might avoid the impact of scarring and reduce laceration and stenosis risk. We aimed to assess the feasibility of such an approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with Barrett's esophagus ≥ 3 cm and ≥ 1 visible lesion (HGD/early cancer) were included. Visible lesions were marked with cautery, and c-RFA (12 J/cm2) was delivered using two applications and a cleaning step, followed by resection of the delineated area. Outcome measures were surface regression of Barrett's esophagus at 3 months, need for subsequent c-RFA, complications, and quality of resection specimens. RESULTS: 24 patients (20 men, 4 women; mean age 68 years, standard deviation [SD] 12; Barrett's esophagus median length C6M8) underwent single-session c-RFA + endoscopic resection, providing a median of 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 2 - 6) resection specimens (early cancer 18 patients; HGD 6). Complications included 1 perforation, 4 bleedings, and 5 stenoses; all were managed endoscopically. Specimens allowed assessment of neoplasia depth, differentiation, and lymphatic/vascular invasion. Median Barrett's esophagus surface regression at 3 months was 95 %. No patient required a second c-RFA procedure and 40 % required repeat endoscopic resection for visible lesions. Complete response for neoplasia was achieved in 100 % and complete response for intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) in 95 %. CONCLUSIONS: c-RFA followed by endoscopic resection in the same session is feasible, but technically demanding and associated with a substantial rate of complications and repeat endoscopic resection. This approach should be reserved for selected cases in expert centers, with endoscopic resection and RFA 6 - 8 weeks later remaining the standard combined approach.

Learning to perform endoscopic resection of esophageal neoplasia is associated with significant complications even within a structured training program.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic resection is the cornerstone of endoscopic treatment of esophageal high grade dysplasia or early cancer. Endoscopic resection is, however, a technically demanding procedure, which requires training and expertise. The aim of the current study was to prospectively evaluate efficacy and safety of the first 120 endoscopic resection procedures of early esophageal neoplasia performed by six endoscopists (20 endoscopic resections each) who were participating in an endoscopic resection training program. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The program consisted of four tri-monthly 1-day courses with lectures, live-demonstrations, hands-on training on anesthetized pigs, and one-on-one hands-on training days. Gastroenterologists from centers with multidisciplinary expertise in upper gastrointestinal oncology participated, together with an endoscopy nurse and a pathologist. Outcome measures were complete endoscopic removal of the target area and acute complications. RESULTS: A total of 120 consecutive esophageal endoscopic resection procedures (85 ER-cap, 35 multiband mucosectomy [MBM]) were performed by six endoscopists: 109 in Barrett's esophagus, 11 for squamous neoplasia; 85 piecemeal endoscopic resections (median 3 specimens, interquartile range 2 - 4 specimens). Complete endoscopic removal was achieved in 111 /120 cases (92.5 %). Six perforations occurred (5.0 %): five were effectively treated endoscopically (clips, covered stent), and one patient underwent esophagectomy. There were 11 acute mild bleedings (9.2 %), which were managed endoscopically. Perforations occurred in ER-cap procedures performed by four participants (7.1 % ER-cap vs. 0 % MBM; P = 0.18), and in 1.7 % of the first 10 endoscopic resections and 8.3 % of the second 10 endoscopic resections per endoscopist (P = 0.26). CONCLUSION: In this intense, structured training program, the first 120 esophageal endoscopic resections performed by six participants were associated with a 5.0 % perforation rate. Although perforations were adequately managed, performing 20 endoscopic resections may not be sufficient to reach the peak of the learning curve in endoscopic resection.

Safety and efficacy of multiband mucosectomy in 1060 resections in Barrett's esophagus.

INTRODUCTION: Multiband mucosectomy (MBM) is a relatively new technique for endoscopic resection in Barrett's esophagus. This ligate-cut technique uses a modified variceal band ligator allowing for six consecutive resections without prior submucosal lifting. The aim was to evaluate the safety of MBM and its efficacy for complete endoscopic removal of delineated target areas in Barrett's esophagus. METHODS: Prospective registration of all MBM procedures in Barrett's esophagus was carried out between November 2004 and October 2009 in two hospitals. Prior to MBM, the target area was delineated with coagulation markings, followed by endoscopic resection until the delineated area was completely resected. Primary end points were acute (during procedure) plus early complications (<30 days) and the rate of complete endoscopic resection of the delineated target area. RESULTS: A total of 243 MBM procedures, with 1060 resections, were performed in 170 patients. MBM was performed for focal lesions (n=113), for Barrett's esophagus removal as part of a (stepwise) radical endoscopic resection protocol (n=117), and as escape treatment after radiofrequency ablation (n=13). The only acute complication was bleeding (in 3%, endoscopically managed); no perforations occurred despite absence of submucosal lifting. Early complications consisted of delayed bleeding (in 2%, endoscopically managed) and stenosis, which occurred in 48% of patients treated in a (stepwise) radical resection protocol; patients treated for focal lesions or in escape treatment showed no stenosis. Complete endoscopic resection was achieved in 91% of the focal lesions, in 86% of cases treated under the (stepwise) radical endoscopic resection protocol, and 100% for escape treatment after radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSION: MBM is a safe and effective technique for the removal of delineated target areas in Barrett's esophagus.

Clinical Trial of the Pan-Caspase Inhibitor, IDN-6556, in Human Liver Preservation Injury.

Cold ischemia/warm reperfusion (CI/WR) injury remains a problem in liver transplantation. The aim of the current study was to assess the utility of the pan-caspase inhibitor IDN-6556 on CI/WR injury during human liver transplantation. This report is a post hoc analysis of a Phase II, multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, parallel group study. Subjects were assigned to four treatment groups: Group 1 (Organ storage/flush: Placebo-Recipient: Placebo); Group 2 (Organ storage/flush: 15 microg/mL-Recipient: Placebo); Group 3 (Organ storage/flush: 5 microg/mL-Recipient: 0.5 mg/kg); and Group 4 (Organ storage/flush: 15 microg/mL-Recipient: 0.5 mg/kg). Liver cell apoptosis was assessed by serum concentrations of the apoptosis-associated CK18Asp396 ('M30') neo-epitope, TUNEL assay and caspase 3/7 immunohistochemistry. Liver injury was assessed by serum AST/ALT determinations. Serum markers of liver cell apoptosis were reduced in all groups receiving drug as compared to placebo. However, TUNEL, caspase 3/7 positive cells and serum AST/ALT levels were only consistently reduced in Group 2 (drug exposed to organ only). This reduction in serum transaminases was significant and observed across the study. In conclusion, IDN-6556 when administered in cold storage and flush solutions during liver transplantation offers local therapeutic protection against CI/WR-mediated apoptosis and injury. However, larger studies are required to confirm these observations.