Incidence and Prediction of Unrelated Mortality After Successful Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Neoplasia.

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).

The Tissue Systems Pathology Test Outperforms Pathology Review in Risk Stratifying Patients With Low-Grade Dysplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is associated with an increased risk of progression in Barrett's esophagus (BE); however, the diagnosis of LGD is limited by substantial interobserver variability. Multiple studies have shown that an objective tissue systems pathology test (TissueCypher Barrett's Esophagus Test, TSP-9), can effectively predict neoplastic progression in patients with BE. This study aimed to compare the risk stratification performance of the TSP-9 test vs benchmarks of generalist and expert pathology. METHODS: A blinded cohort study was conducted in the screening cohort of a randomized controlled trial of patients with BE with community-based LGD. Biopsies from the first endoscopy with LGD were assessed by the TSP-9 test and independently reviewed by 30 pathologists from 5 countries per standard practice. The accuracy of the test and the diagnoses in predicting high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) were compared. RESULTS: A total of 154 patients with BE (122 men), mean age 60.9 ± 9.8 years were studied. Twenty-four patients progressed to HGD/EAC within 5 years (median time of 1.7 years) and 130 did not progress to HGD/EAC within 5 years (median 7.8 years follow-up). The TSP-9 test demonstrated higher sensitivity (71% vs mean 63%, range 33%-88% across 30 pathologists), than the pathology review in detecting patients who progressed (P = .01186). CONCLUSIONS: The TSP-9 test outperformed the pathologists in risk stratifying patients with BE with LGD. Care guided by the test can provide an effective solution to variable pathology review of LGD, improving health outcomes by upstaging care to therapeutic intervention for patients at high risk for progression, while reducing unnecessary interventions in low-risk patients.

Towards personalized management of early esophageal adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to discuss recent advancements in the endoscopic management of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (T1 EAC). RECENT FINDINGS: Patients with high-risk EAC (defined by the presence of deep submucosal invasion, and/or lymphovascular invasion, and/or poor differentiation) have a higher risk of lymph node metastases than those with low-risk EAC. However, more recent, endoscopically-focused studies report a lower risk of lymph node metastases and distant metastases for high-risk EAC than previously assumed. Instead of referring all high-risk EAC patients for esophagectomy after a radical endoscopic resection, an alternative approach involving regular upper endoscopy with endoscopic ultrasound may allow for detection of intra-luminal recurrence and lymph node metastases at an early and potentially curable stage. SUMMARY: Endoscopic resection of mucosal and submucosal EAC might prove to be safe and curative for selected cases in the future, when followed by a strict follow-up protocol. Despite the promising results of preliminary studies, there is an ongoing need for personalized strategies and new risk stratification methods to decide on the best management for individual patients with high-risk T1 EAC.

The use of a real-time computer-aided detection system for visible lesions in the Barrett's esophagus during live endoscopic procedures: a pilot study (video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This pilot study evaluated the performance of a recently developed computer-aided detection (CADe) system for Barrett's neoplasia during live endoscopic procedures. METHODS: Fifteen patients with a visible lesion and 15 without were included in this study. A CAD-assisted workflow was used that included a slow pullback video recording of the entire Barrett's segment with live CADe assistance, followed by CADe-assisted level-based video recordings every 2 cm of the Barrett's segment. Outcomes were per-patient and per-level diagnostic accuracy of the CAD-assisted workflow, in which the primary outcome was per-patient in vivo CADe sensitivity. RESULTS: In the per-patient analyses, the CADe system detected all visible lesions (sensitivity 100%). Per-patient CADe specificity was 53%. Per-level sensitivity and specificity of the CADe assisted workflow were 100% and 73%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, detection by the CADe system of all potentially neoplastic lesions in Barrett's esophagus was comparable to that of an expert endoscopist. Continued refinement of the system may improve specificity. External validation in larger multicenter studies is planned. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05628441.).

COMPUTER-AIDED DIAGNOSIS IMPROVES CHARACTERIZATION OF BARRETT'S NEOPLASIA BY GENERAL ENDOSCOPISTS.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Characterization of visible abnormalities in Barrett esophagus (BE) patients can be challenging, especially for unexperienced endoscopists. This results in suboptimal diagnostic accuracy and poor inter-observer agreement. Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems may assist endoscopists. We aimed to develop, validate and benchmark a CADx system for BE neoplasia. METHODS: The CADx system received pretraining with ImageNet with consecutive domain-specific pretraining with GastroNet which includes 5 million endoscopic images. It was subsequently trained and internally validated using 1,758 narrow-band imaging (NBI) images of early BE neoplasia (352 patients) and 1,838 NBI images of non-dysplastic BE (173 patients) from 8 international centers. CADx was tested prospectively on corresponding image and video test sets with 30 cases (20 patients) of BE neoplasia and 60 cases (31 patients) of non-dysplastic BE. The test set was benchmarked by 44 general endoscopists in two phases (phase 1: no CADx assistance; phase 2: with CADx assistance). Ten international BE experts provided additional benchmark performance. RESULTS: Stand-alone sensitivity and specificity of the CADx system were 100% and 98% for images and 93% and 96% for videos, respectively. CADx outperformed general endoscopists without CADx assistance in terms of sensitivity (p=0.04). Sensitivity and specificity of general endoscopist increased from 84% to 96% and 90 to 98% with CAD assistance (p<0.001), respectively. CADx assistance increased endoscopists' confidence in characterization (p<0.001). CADx performance was similar to Barrett experts. CONCLUSION: CADx assistance significantly increased characterization performance of BE neoplasia by general endoscopists to the level of expert endoscopists. The use of this CADx system may thereby improve daily Barrett surveillance.

Western outcomes of circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection (cESD) in the esophagus has been reported to be feasible in small Eastern case series. We assessed the outcomes of cESD in the treatment of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Western countries. METHODS: We conducted an international study at 25 referral centers in Europe and Australia using prospective databases. We included all patients with ESCC treated with cESD before November 2022. Our main outcomes were curative resection according to European guidelines and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 171 cESDs were performed on 165 patients. En bloc and R0 resections rates were 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.0-99.4) and 69.6% (95% CI, 62.3-76.0), respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 49.1% (95% CI, 41.7-56.6) of the lesions. The most common reason for noncurative resection was deep submucosal invasion (21.6%). The risk of stricture requiring 6 or more dilations or additional techniques (incisional therapy/stent) was high (71%), despite the use of prophylactic measures in 93% of the procedures. The rates of intraprocedural perforation, delayed bleeding, and adverse cardiorespiratory events were 4.1%, 0.6%, and 4.7%, respectively. Two patients died (1.2%) of a cESD-related adverse event. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 2 years were 91% and 79%. CONCLUSIONS: In Western referral centers, cESD for ESCC is curative in approximately half of the lesions. It can be considered a feasible treatment in selected patients. Our results suggest the need to improve patient selection and to develop more effective therapies to prevent esophageal strictures.

Anti-reflux mucosectomy for gastroesophageal reflux disease: efficacy and the mechanism of action.

Previous studies suggest that anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) is effective in reducing reflux symptoms and total acid exposure, although the mechanism is unknown. Our objective was to investigate the effect of ARMS on reflux parameters and mechanism of action. METHODS: Gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) patients with insufficient symptom control despite twice daily proton pump inhibitor (PPI) underwent a piecemeal multiband mucosectomy of 50% of the circumference of the esophago-gastric-junction (EGJ), extending 2cm into the cardia. The primary endpoint was the total number of reflux episodes during 24-h pH-impedance studies. RESULTS: 11 patients were treated (8 men, age 37 (32-57) years), one patient is lost to follow-up after treatment. ARMS reduced the total number of reflux episodes from 74 (50-82) to 37 (28-66) p=0.008) and total acid exposure from 8.7% (6.4-12.7) to 5.3% (3.5-6.7) (p=0.008). Treatment reduced the number of transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations (TLESRs) (from 4 (1-8) to 2 (1-4), p=0.027) during a 90-minute postprandial period. Reflux symptoms were reduced substantially (from 3.6 (3.6-3.9) to 1.6 (0.7-2.7), p=0.007). Treatment did not increase dysphagia (Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire)of 8.2 (±7.3) to 8.5 (±6.5) (p=0.879). Impedance planimetry showed no changes in EGJ distensibility after treatment (4.4 (±2.1) mm2/mmHg to 4.3 (±2.2) mm2/mmHg), p=0.952). One delayed post-procedural bleeding (10%, (1/10)) occurred requiring repeat endoscopy, no strictures developed. CONCLUSION: ARMS is an effective treatment option in PPI refractory GERD patients reducing acid exposure, reflux episodes and symptoms. While its working mechanism could not be explained by a difference in distensibility, a reduction in TLSERs might play a role.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: long-term results from a Western cohort.

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.

Safety and efficacy of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett's neoplasia recurrence after radiofrequency ablation.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for Barrett's neoplasia recurrence after radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHODS: Data from patients at 16 centers were collected for a multicenter retrospective study. Patients who underwent at least one RFA treatment for Barrett's esophagus and thereafter underwent further esophageal ESD for neoplasia recurrence were included. RESULTS: Data from 56 patients who underwent salvage ESD between April 2014 and November 2022 were collected. Immediate complications included one muscular tear (1.8%) treated with stent (Agree classification: grade IIIa). Two transmural perforations (3.6%; treated with clips) and five muscular tears (8.9%; two treated with clips) had no clinical impact and were not considered as adverse events. Seven patients (12.5%) developed strictures (grade IIIa), which were treated with balloon dilation. Histological analysis showed 36 adenocarcinoma, 17 high grade dysplasia, and 3 low grade dysplasia. En bloc and R0 resection rates were 89.3% and 66.1%, respectively. Resections were curative in 33 patients (58.9%), and noncurative in 22 patients (39.3%), including 11 "local risk" (19.6%) and 11 "high risk" (19.6%) resections. At the end of follow-up with a median time of 14 (0-75) months after salvage ESD, and with further endoscopic treatment if necessary (RFA, argon plasma coagulation, endoscopic mucosal resection, ESD), neoplasia remission ratio was 37/53 (69.8%) and the median remission time was 13 (1-75) months. CONCLUSION: In expert hands, salvage ESD was a safe and effective treatment for recurrence of Barrett's neoplasia after RFA treatment.

Vertical tumor-positive resection margins and the risk of residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection of Barrett's neoplasia: a nationwide cohort with pathology reassessment.

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.

Dysplastic Recurrence After Successful Treatment for Early Barrett's Neoplasia: Development and Validation of a Prediction Model.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The combination of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is the treatment of choice for eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with dysplasia and/or early cancer. Currently, there are no evidence-based recommendations on how to survey patients after successful treatment, and most patients undergo frequent follow-up endoscopies. We aimed to develop and externally validate a prediction model for visible dysplastic recurrence, which can be used to personalize surveillance after treatment. METHODS: We collected data from the Dutch Barrett Expert Center Registry, a nationwide registry that captures outcomes from all patients with BE undergoing endoscopic treatment in the Netherlands in a centralized care setting. We used predictors related to demographics, severity of reflux, histologic status at baseline, and treatment characteristics. We built a Fine and Gray survival model with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator penalization to predict the incidence of visible dysplastic recurrence after initial successful treatment. The model was validated externally in patients with BE treated in Switzerland and Belgium. RESULTS: A total of 1154 patients with complete BE eradication were included for model building. During a mean endoscopic follow-up of 4 years, 38 patients developed recurrent disease (1.0%/person-year). The following characteristics were independently associated with recurrence (strongest to weakest predictor): a new visible lesion during treatment phase, higher number of endoscopic resection treatments, male sex, increasing BE length, high-grade dysplasia or cancer at baseline, and younger age. External validation showed a C-statistic of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.94) with good calibration. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first externally validated model to predict visible dysplastic recurrence after successful endoscopic eradication treatment of BE with dysplasia or early cancer. On external validation, our model has good discrimination and calibration. This model can help clinicians and patients to determine a personalized follow-up strategy.

Clinical Relevance of Random Biopsies From the Esophagogastric Junction After Complete Eradication of Barrett's Esophagus is Low.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although random histological sampling from the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) after complete eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) is recommended, its clinical relevance is questionable. This study aimed to assess the incidence and long-term outcomes of findings from random EGJ biopsies in a nationwide cohort with long-term follow-up. METHODS: We included all patients with successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET), defined as complete endoscopic eradication of all visible BE (CE-BE), for early BE neoplasia from the Dutch registry. Patients were treated and followed-up in 9 expert centers according to a joint protocol. Outcomes included the incidence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) at the EGJ (EGJ-IM) and the association between IM and visible (dysplastic) BE recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 1154 patients were included with a median follow-up of 43 months (interquartile range, 22-69 months). At the time of CE-BE, persisting EGJ-IM was found in 7% of patients (78/1154), which was reproduced during further follow-up in 46% of patients (42/78). No significant association existed between persisting EGJ-IM at CE-BE and recurrent non-dysplastic or dysplastic BE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-2.13 and HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.17-3.06, respectively). Among patients with no EGJ-IM at the time of CE-BE (1043/1154; 90%), EGJ-IM recurred in 7% (72/1043) after a median of 21 months (interquartile range, 15-36 months), and was reproduced during further follow-up in 26% of patients (19/72). No association was found between recurrent EGJ-IM and non-dysplastic or dysplastic recurrence (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.67-2.06 and HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.04-1.96, respectively). CONCLUSION: Because EGJ-IM was not associated with a higher risk for recurrent disease, we recommend to consider abandoning random EGJ sampling after successful EET, under the condition that care is provided in expert centers, and the esophagus, including the EGJ, is carefully inspected (Netherlands Trial Register, NL7309).

An Automated Tissue Systems Pathology Test Can Standardize the Management and Improve Health Outcomes for Patients With Barrett's Esophagus.

INTRODUCTION: Low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is associated with an increased risk of progression to high-grade dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, because of substantial interobserver variability in the diagnosis of LGD, a patient's management plan and health outcome depend largely on which pathologist reviews their case. This study evaluated the ability of a tissue systems pathology test that objectively risk stratifies patients with BE (TissueCypher, TSP-9) to standardize management in a manner consistent with improved health outcomes for patients with BE. METHODS: A total of 154 patients with BE with community-based LGD from the prospectively followed screening cohort of the SURF trial were studied. Management decisions were simulated 500 times with varying generalist (n = 16) and expert (n = 14) pathology reviewers to determine the most likely care plan with or without use of the TSP-9 test for guidance. The percentage of patients receiving appropriate management based on the known progression/nonprogression outcomes was calculated. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with 100% of simulations resulting in appropriate management significantly increased from 9.1% for pathology alone, to 58.4% when TSP-9 results were used with pathology, and further increased to 77.3% of patients receiving appropriate management when only TSP-9 results were used. Use of the test results also significantly increased the consistency of management decisions for patients when their slides were reviewed by different pathologists ( P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Management guided by the TSP-9 test can standardize care plans by increasing the early detection of progressors who can receive therapeutic interventions, while also increasing the percentage of nonprogressors who can avoid unnecessary therapy and be managed by surveillance alone.

Feasibility and Safety of Tailored Lymphadenectomy Using Sentinel Node-Navigated Surgery in Patients with High-Risk T1 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Selective lymphadenectomy using sentinel node-navigated surgery (SNNS) might offer a less invasive alternative to esophagectomy in patients with high-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new treatment strategy, consisting of radical endoscopic resection of the tumor followed by SNNS. METHODS: In this multicenter pilot study, ten patients with a radically resected high-risk pT1cN0 EAC underwent SNNS. A hybrid tracer of technetium-99m nanocolloid and indocyanine green was injected endoscopically around the resection scar the day before surgery, followed by preoperative imaging. During surgery, sentinel nodes (SNs) were identified using a thoracolaparoscopic gammaprobe and fluorescence-based detection, and subsequently resected. Endpoints were surgical morbidity and number of detected and resected (tumor-positive) SNs. RESULTS: Localization and dissection of SNs was feasible in all ten patients (median 3 SNs per patient, range 1-6). The concordance between preoperative imaging and intraoperative detection was high. In one patient (10%), dissection was considered incomplete after two SNs were not identified intraoperatively. Additional peritumoral SNs were resected in four patients (40%) after fluorescence-based detection. In two patients (20%), a (micro)metastasis was found in one of the resected SNs. One patient experienced neuropathic thoracic pain related to surgery, while none of the patients developed functional gastroesophageal disorders. CONCLUSIONS: SNNS appears to be a feasible and safe instrument to tailor lymphadenectomy in patients with high-risk T1 EAC. Future research with long-term follow-up is warranted to determine whether this esophageal preserving strategy is justified for high-risk T1 EAC.

The course of pain and dysphagia after radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is effective for eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) neoplasia, but little is known on the course of pain and dysphagia after RFA. We aimed to describe the course of post-RFA symptoms and to identify possible associated risk factors. METHODS: In this multicenter, observational cohort study, all RFA procedures registered in a prospective database were included. Patient and treatment characteristics were collected from medical records and patients self-registered post-procedural symptoms in electronic symptom diaries for 14 days. Mixed model regression was used for the analyses. RESULTS: In total, 255 diaries were completed. Post-RFA pain was reported for 95 % (95 %CI 93-98) of procedures (median duration 14 days; 25th-75th percentiles [p25-p75] 11-14) and major pain for 64 % (95 %CI 58-69; median duration 8 days, p25-p75 3-13). Post-procedural pain significantly increased with BE length, younger age, and no prior ablation. Dysphagia was present after 83 % (95 %CI 79-88) of procedures (median duration 13 days, p25-p75 9-14). The risk of dysphagia decreased with age and increased when patients experienced more pain. CONCLUSIONS: RFA treatment for BE-related neoplasia seems a significant burden for patients, and post-procedural symptoms should be taken into account when counseling patients before starting endoscopic eradication therapy.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for esophageal perforation: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a novel treatment for esophageal perforations. This study aimed to describe initial experience with EVT of esophageal perforations due to iatrogenic cause, Boerhaave syndrome, or other perforations not related to prior upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS : Data from patients treated with EVT for esophageal perforation at five hospitals in three European countries, between January 2018 and October 2021, were retrospectively collected. The primary end point was successful defect closure by EVT, with or without the use of other endoscopic treatment modalities. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events. RESULTS : 27 patients were included (median age 71 years). The success rate was 89 % (24/27, 95 %CI 77-100). EVT failed in three patients: two deceased during EVT (septic embolic stroke, pulmonary embolism) and one underwent esophagectomy due to a persisting defect. Two adverse events occurred: one iatrogenic defect expansion during sponge exchange and one hemorrhage during sponge removal. Median treatment duration was 12 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6-16) with 1 sponge exchange (IQR 1-3). CONCLUSION : EVT is a promising organ-preserving treatment for esophageal perforations, with a success rate of 89 %. More experience with the technique and indications will likely improve success rates.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) was introduced as treatment for anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. The aim of this study was to describe the initial experience with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Patients treated with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery were included retrospectively (January 2018-June 2021) and prospectively (June 2021-October 2021). The primary end point was the EVT success rate. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events. RESULTS: 38 patients were included (31 men; mean age 66 years): 27 had undergone an esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction and 11 a total gastrectomy with esophagojejunal anastomosis. EVT was successful in 28 patients (74 %, 95 %CI 57 %-87 %). In 10 patients, EVT failed: deceased owing to radiation pneumonitis (n = 1), EVT-associated complications (n = 2), and defect closure not achieved (n = 7). Mean duration of successful EVT was 33 days, with a median of six EVT-related endoscopies. Median hospital stay was 45 days. CONCLUSION: This initial experience with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery demonstrated a success rate of 74 %. EVT is a promising therapy that could prevent further major surgery. More experience with the technique and its indications will likely improve success rates in the future.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2: ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3: ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4: ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5: ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6: ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7: ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8: ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9: ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B: ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C: ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D: ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E: ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11: After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

EAES Multidisciplinary Rapid Guideline: systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment and evidence-informed recommendations on the surgical management of paraesophageal hernias.

BACKGROUND: New evidence has emerged since latest guidelines on the management of paraesophageal hernia, and guideline development methodology has evolved. Members of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery have prioritized the management of paraesophageal hernia to be addressed by pertinent recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on paraesophageal hernias, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. METHODS: We performed three systematic reviews, and we summarized and appraised the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. A panel of general and upper gastrointestinal surgeons, gastroenterologists and a patient advocate discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost and use of resources, moderated by a Guidelines International Network-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. RESULTS: The panel suggests surgery over conservative management for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias (conditional recommendation), and recommends conservative management over surgery for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias in frail patients (strong recommendation). Further, the panel suggests mesh over sutures for hiatal closure in paraesophageal hernia repair, fundoplication over gastropexy in elective paraesophageal hernia repair, and gastropexy over fundoplication in patients who have cardiopulmonary instability and require emergency paraesophageal hernia repair (conditional recommendation). A strong recommendation means that the proposed course of action is appropriate for the vast majority of patients. A conditional recommendation means that most patients would opt for the proposed course of action, and joint decision-making of the surgeon and the patient is required. Accompanying evidence summaries and evidence-to-decision frameworks should be read when using the recommendations. This guideline applies to adult patients with moderate to large paraesophageal hernias type II to IV with at least 50% of the stomach herniated to the thoracic cavity. The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/j7q7Gn . CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary panel provides recommendations on key topics on the management of paraesophageal hernias using highest methodological standards and following a transparent process. GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER: PREPARE-2023CN018.

Long-term fear of cancer recurrence in patients treated endoscopically for early Barrett's neoplasia.

Previous studies on fear of cancer recurrence after endoscopic treatment for early Barrett's neoplasia focused on fear during a relatively short period after the intervention. The aim of this study was to explore whether fear of cancer (recurrence) persists during long-term follow-up in patients treated endoscopically for Barrett's neoplasia compared to patients treated surgically for a more advanced stage of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Participants previously participated in a prospective longitudinal study investigating quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence and were treated endoscopically for early Barrett's neoplasia (high-grade dysplasia-T1sm1N0M0) or surgically for a more advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (T1N0M0-T3N1M0). For the present study, participants were again invited to complete a set of questionnaires including the fear of cancer recurrence scale (FORS), worry for cancer scale (WOCS), and the anxiety subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS Anxiety). Thirty-nine patients were eligible in the endoscopy group and 28 in the surgical group. The median time between the baseline measurement (original study) and the long-term follow-up assessment was 4 years (interquartile range 3-5 years). Fear and worry for cancer recurrence and general anxiety diminished over time in both treatment groups. However, at long-term follow-up, endoscopically treated patients had significantly higher levels of worry for cancer and general anxiety than surgically treated patients. Fear of cancer recurrence did not significantly differ between endoscopically and surgically treated patients. We found that worry and fear of cancer recurrence and general anxiety in endoscopically treated patients declined over time, but not as much as in surgically treated patients.