Impact of withdrawal time on adenoma detection rate: results from a prospective multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Performing a high-quality colonoscopy is critical for optimizing the adenoma detection rate (ADR). Colonoscopy withdrawal time (a surrogate measure) of ≥6 minutes is recommended; however, a threshold of a high-quality withdrawal and its impact on ADR are not known. METHODS: We examined withdrawal time (excluding polyp resection and bowel cleaning time) of subjects undergoing screening and/or surveillance colonoscopy in a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. We examined the relationship of withdrawal time in 1-minute increments on ADR and reported odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Linear regression analysis was performed to assess the maximal inspection time threshold that impacts the ADR. RESULTS: A total of 1142 subjects (age, 62.3 ± 8.9 years; 80.5% men) underwent screening (45.9%) or surveillance (53.6%) colonoscopy. The screening group had a median withdrawal time of 9.0 minutes (interquartile range [IQR], 3.3) with an ADR of 49.6%, whereas the surveillance group had a median withdrawal time of 9.3 minutes (IQR, 4.3) with an ADR of 63.9%. ADR correspondingly increased for a withdrawal time of 6 minutes to 13 minutes, beyond which ADR did not increase (50.4% vs 76.6%, P < .01). For every 1-minute increase in withdrawal time, there was 6% higher odds of detecting an additional subject with an adenoma (OR, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.10; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this multicenter, randomized controlled trial underscore the importance of a high-quality examination and efforts required to achieve this with an incremental yield in ADR based on withdrawal time. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03952611.).

Diagnostic performance of volumetric laser endomicroscopy for Barrett's esophagus dysplasia amongst gastroenterology trainees.

BACKGROUND: Volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE) is an advanced imaging modality used in Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance. VLE image interpretation is challenged by subtle grayscale image variation across a large amount of data. Training in VLE interpretation is not standardized. This study aims to determine if VLE training can be incorporated into a gastroenterology (GI) fellowship curriculum with the use of a self-directed module. METHODS: A standardized, self-directed training module (30 min) was created explaining the background and established VLE criteria for the diagnosis of BE dysplasia. A VLE image dataset was generated from a multicenter VLE database of targeted biopsies. GI trainees were asked to grade each image for the presence or absence of the following criteria (I) increased surface optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) signal intensity and (II) atypical glands and provide a final diagnosis (dysplastic vs. non-dysplastic). Diagnostic performance was calculated and results compared to VLE expert interpretation using histology as the gold-standard. RESULTS: The dataset included 50 VLE images (10 high-grade dysplasia, 40 non-dysplastic BE). VLE images were reviewed in a randomized and blinded fashion by 5 GI trainees with no prior VLE experience and 5 experienced VLE users. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of GI trainees was 83.3% (95% CI: 71.5-91.7%), 59.0% (95% CI: 51.6-66.0%), and 64.8% (95% CI: 58.5-70.7%) compared to 80.0% (95% CI: 67.7-89.2%), 79.5% (95% CI: 73.0-85.0%), and 79.6% (95% CI: 74.1-84.4%) for VLE experts respectively. The difference in specificity and accuracy between the two groups were statistically significant with P<0.001. CONCLUSIONS: A brief training session on VLE is inadequate to reach competency in interpretation of VLE by GI trainees. Additional experience is required to accurately interpret VLE images.

High-Definition Colonoscopy Compared With Cuff- and Cap-Assisted Colonoscopy: Results From a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Mucosal exposure devices including distal attachments such as the cuff and cap have shown variable results in improving adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared with high-definition white light colonoscopy (HDWLE). METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy comparing HDWLE to 2 different types of distal attachments: cuff (CF) (Endocuff Vision) or cap (CP) (Reveal). The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes included adenomas per colonoscopy, advanced adenoma and sessile serrated lesion detection rate, right-sided ADR, withdrawal time, and adverse events. Continuous variables were compared using Student's t test and categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test using statistical software Stata version16. A P value <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 1203 subjects were randomized to either HDWLE (n = 384; mean 62 years of age; 81.3% males), CF (n = 379; mean 62.7 years of age; 79.9% males) or CP (n = 379; mean age 62.1 years of age; 80.5% males). No significant differences were found among 3 groups for ADR (57.3%, 59.1%, and 55.7%; P = .6), adenomas per colonoscopy (1.4 ± 1.9, 1.6 ± 2.4, and 1.4 ± 2; P = .3), advanced adenoma (7.6%, 9.2%, and 8.2%; P = .7), sessile serrated lesion (6.8%, 6.3%, and 5.5%; P = .8), or right ADR (48.2%, 49.3%, and 46.2%; P = .7). The number of polyps per colonoscopy were significantly higher in the CF group compared with HDWLE and CP group (2.7 ± 3.4, 2.3 ± 2.5, and 2.2 ± 2.3; P = .013). In a multivariable model, after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, withdrawal time, and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score, there was no impact of device type on the primary outcome of ADR (P = .77). In screening patients, CF resulted in more neoplasms per colonoscopy (CF: 1.7 ± 2.6, HDWLE: 1.3 ± 1.7, and CP: 1.2 ± 1.8; P = .047) with a shorter withdrawal time. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this multicenter randomized controlled trial do not show any significant benefit of using either distal attachment devices (CF or CP) over HDWLE, at least in high-detector endoscopists. The Endocuff may have an advantage in the screening population. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03952611).

Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Cancer Related Mortality After Detection of Low-risk or High-risk Adenomas, Compared With No Adenoma, at Index Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) among patients with no adenomas, low-risk adenomas (LRAs), or high-risk adenomas (HRAs), detected at index colonoscopy, is unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare incidence rates of metachronous CRC and CRC-related mortality after a baseline colonoscopy for each group. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases for studies that reported the incidence of CRC and adenoma characteristics after colonoscopy. The primary outcome was odds of metachronous CRC and CRC-related mortality per 10,000 person-years of follow-up after baseline colonoscopy for all the groups. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 12 studies with 510,019 patients (mean age, 59.2 ± 2.6 years; 55% male; mean duration of follow up, 8.5 ± 3.3 years). The incidence of CRC per 10,000 person-years was marginally higher for patients with LRAs compared to those with no adenomas (4.5 vs 3.4; odds ratio [OR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06-1.51; I2=0), but significantly higher for patients with HRAs compared to those with no adenoma ( 13.8 vs 3.4; odds ratio [OR], 2.92; 95% CI, 2.31-3.69; I2=0 ) and patients with HRAs compared to LRAs (13.81 vs 4.5; OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.72-3.20; I2=55%). However, the CRC-related mortality per 10,000 person-years did not differ significantly for patients with LRAs compared to no adenomas (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.76-1.74; I2=0) but was significantly higher in persons with HRAs compared with LRAs (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.30-4.75; I2=38%) and no adenomas (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.87-3.87; I2=0). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that the risk of metachronous CRC and mortality is significantly higher for patients with HRAs, but this risk is very low in patients with LRAs, comparable to patients with no adenomas. Follow-up of patients with LRAs detected at index colonoscopy should be the same as for persons with no adenomas.

Low Risk of Progression of Barrett's Esophagus to Neoplasia in Women.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Men are at a higher risk for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), but little is known about BE progression to dysplasia and EAC in women. We performed a retrospective, multicenter cohort study to assess risk of BE progression to dysplasia and EAC in women compared with men. We also investigated comorbidities, medication use, and endoscopic features that contribute to sex differences in risk of BE progression. METHODS: We collected data from large cohort of patients with BE seen at 6 centers in the United States and Europe, followed for a median 5.7 years. We obtained demographic information (age, sex, ethnicity), clinical history (tobacco use, body mass index, comorbidities), endoscopy results (procedure date, BE segment length), and histopathology findings. Neoplasia was graded as low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or EAC. Rates of disease progression between women and men were compared using χ2 analysis and the Student t test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between sex and disease progression after adjusting for possible confounding variables. RESULTS: Of the total 4263 patients in the cohort, 2145 met the inclusion criteria, including 324 (15%) women. There was a total of 34 (1.6%) incident EACs, with an overall annual incidence of 0.3% (95% confidence interval: 0.2%-0.4%). We found significant differences between women and men in annual incidence rates of EAC (0.05% for women vs. 0.3% in men; P=0.04) and in the combined endpoint of HGD or EAC (0.1% for women vs. 1.1% for men; P<0.001). Female gender was an independent predictor for reduced progression to HGD or EAC when rates of progression were adjusted for body mass index, smoking history, race, use of aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, proton-pump inhibitors, or statins, hypertriglyceridemia, BE length, and histology findings at baseline (hazard ratio: 0.11; 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.45; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter study of men versus women with BE, we found a significantly lower risk of disease progression to cancer and HGD in women. The extremely low risk of EAC in women with BE (0.05%/y) indicates that surveillance endoscopy may not be necessary for this subgroup of patients with BE.

Diagnostic accuracy of a novel third generation esophageal capsule as a non-invasive detection method for Barrett's esophagus: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Previous two generations of esophageal capsule did not show adequate detection rates for Barrett's esophagus (BE). We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of a novel third generation capsule with an improved frame rate of 35 frames per second for the detection of BE in a pilot study. METHODS: This was a blinded prospective pilot study conducted at a tertiary medical center. Patients with known BE (at least C0M > 1) who presented for endoscopic surveillance (May to October 2017) were included. All patients underwent novel esophageal capsule (PillCam™ UGI; Medtronic) ingestion using the simplified ingestion protocol followed by standard high-definition upper endoscopy (esophagogastroduodenoscopy [EGD]). Capsule endoscopy findings were interpreted by examiners blinded to endoscopy results and compared with endoscopic findings (gold standard). Following completion of both tests, a subjective questionnaire was provided to all patients regarding their experience. RESULTS: Twenty patients (95%males, mean age 66.3 [±7.9] years) with BE undergoing surveillance EGD were eligible. The mean BE length was 3.5 (±2.7) cm. Novel esophageal capsule detected BE in 75% patients when images were compared with endoscopy. Novel capsule detected BE in 82% patients when the BE length was ≥2 cm. The mean esophageal transit time was 0.59 s. On a subjective questionnaire, all 20 patients reported novel capsule as being more convenient compared with EGD. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot, single-center study, novel esophageal capsule was shown to be not ready for population screening of BE. Studies integrating artificial intelligence into improved quality novel esophageal capsule should be performed for BE screening.

Surveillance of neo-squamous epithelium after ablation of Barrett's esophagus: is it better to use jumbo over standard biopsy forceps?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: As obtaining adequate tissue on biopsy is critical for the detection of residual and recurrent intestinal metaplasia/dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients undergone Barrett's endoscopic eradication therapy (BET), we decided to compare the adequacy of biopsy specimens using jumbo versus standard biopsy forceps. METHODS: This is a two-center study of patients' post-radiofrequency ablation of dysplastic BE. After BET, jumbo (Boston Scientific©, Radial Jaw 4, opening diameter 2.8 mm) or standard (Boston Scientific©, Radial Jaw 4, opening diameter 2.2 mm) biopsy forceps were utilized to obtain surveillance biopsies from the neo-squamous epithelium. Presence of lamina propria and proportion of squamous epithelium with partial or full thickness lamina propria was recorded by two experienced gastrointestinal pathologists who were blinded. Squamous epithelial biopsies that contained at least two-thirds of lamina propria were considered 'adequate'. RESULTS: In a total of 211 biopsies from 55 BE patients, 145 biopsies (29 patients, 18 males, mean age 61 years, interquartile range [IQR] 33-83) were obtained using jumbo forceps and 66 biopsies (26 patients, all males, mean age 65 years, IQR 56-76) using standard forceps biopsies. Comparing jumbo versus standard forceps, the proportion of specimens with any subepithelial lamina propria was 51.7% versus 53%, P = 0.860 and the presence of adequate subepithelial lamina propria was 17.9% versus 9.1%, P = 0.096 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Use of jumbo forceps does not appear to have added advantage over standard forceps to obtain adequate biopsy specimens from the neo-squamous mucosa post-ablation.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Resection of Sessile Serrated Polyps 10 mm or Larger: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The best method for endoscopic resection of sessile serrated polyps (SSP) 10 mm or larger is unclear; studies report variable outcomes in comparison to conventional adenomas. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of resection of SSPs 10 mm or larger in size. METHODS: We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies reporting data on endoscopic resection of SSPs 10 mm or larger, through May 31st, 2019. The primary outcome was rate of residual SSP, which was the rate of residual SSP found at the polypectomy site during the first follow-up colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were: technical success (rate of complete macroscopic resection), R0 resection rate (complete histological resection with absence of any polyp tissue at the lateral and deep margins after en-bloc resection), and adverse events (immediate or delayed bleeding and perforation). We performed IQR,group analyses for outcomes based on polyp size and resection techniques. Pooled proportion rates (%) or odds ratio with 95% CIs with heterogeneity (I2) and P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria: 911 patients (50.2% male; mean age, 62.8 ± 4.9 years) who underwent resection of 1137 SSPs (574 SSPs ≥ 20 mm) with a median polyp size of 19.4 mm (interquartile range, 15.9-29.6 mm). Follow-up information was available for 832 SSPs with a median follow-up duration of 12 months (interquartile range, 6-22.5 months). Piecemeal resection was performed in 58.5% SSPs. The pooled residual SSP rate was 4.3% (95% CI, 2%-6.5%). There was a higher residual SSP rate for polyps ≥ 20 mm compared to 10-19 mm (5.9% vs 1.2%; odds ratio, 3.02; 95% CI, 1-9.2; P = .049). Cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) had significantly lower rates of delayed bleeding (0 vs 2.3%; P = .03) and residual polyp rate (0.9% vs 5%; P=.01) compared to hot EMR, based on univariate analysis. In multi-variate analysis there was no difference in residual polyp rate. There was no significant difference in other outcomes based on the size or method of resection. CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that SSPs ≥ 10 mm can be safely resected with low residual polyp rates. Polyp size ≥ 20 mm is a significant factor for residual polyp. Compared to hot EMR, cold EMR is associated with a lower rate of delayed bleeding. Randomized controlled trials comparing hot and cold resection are needed to standardize techniques and optimize outcomes.

Improving serrated adenoma detection rate in the colon by electronic chromoendoscopy and distal attachment: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The evidence for modification of conventional colonoscopy using either "distal attachments" (DAs; endocap, endocuff, and endoring) or "electronic chromoendoscopy" (EC; narrow-band imaging [NBI], iScan, blue-light imaging, autofluorescence imaging, and linked-color imaging) to improve the detection of serrated adenomas during colonoscopy has shown conflicting results. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using Medline, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane Library based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any DA or EC with high-definition white-light colonoscopy for detection of serrated adenomas (sessile serrated adenoma/polyp and traditional serrated adenoma) were included. The primary outcome was serrated adenoma detection rate (SADR) defined as the number of patients with at least 1 serrated adenoma of total patients in that group. The secondary outcome was the number of serrated adenomas per subject. Pooled rates were reported using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Seventeen studies with 13,631 patients (56% men; age range, 50-66 years) met the inclusion criteria. The use of DAs (RR, 1.21; P = .45) and EC (RR, 1.29; P = .09) during colonoscopy did not show a significant improvement in SADR. The SADR using EC was 6.9% (4 studies) and that with NBI alone was 3.7% (3 studies). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that, except for NBI, the use of DAs or EC during colonoscopy does not improve detection of serrated adenomas in the colon. More RCTs evaluating NBI are needed to explore the effect.

Lower Annual Rate of Progression of Short-Segment vs Long-Segment Barrett's Esophagus to Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: European guidelines recommend different surveillance intervals of non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) based on segment length, as opposed to guidelines in the United States, which do recommend surveillance intervals based on BE length. We studied rates of progression of NDBE to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with short-segment BE using the definition of BE in the latest guidelines (length ≥1 cm). METHODS: We collected demographic, clinical, endoscopy, and histopathology data from 1883 patients with endoscopic evidence of NDBE (mean age, 57.3 years; 83.5% male; 88.1% Caucasians) seen at 7 tertiary referral centers. Patients were followed for a median 6.4 years. Cases of dysplasia or EAC detected within 1 year of index endoscopy were considered prevalent and were excluded. Unadjusted rates of progression to HGD or EAC were compared between patients with short (≥1 and <3) and long (≥3) BE lengths using log-rank tests. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients with a documented Prague C&M classification. We used a multivariable proportional hazards model to evaluate the association between BE length and progression. Adjusted hazards ratios were calculated after adjusting for variables associated with progression. RESULTS: We found 822 patients to have a short-segment BE (SSBE) and 1061 to have long segment BE (LSBE). We found patients with SSBE to have a significantly lower annual rate of progression to EAC (0.07%) than of patients with LSBE (0.25%) (P = .001). For the combined endpoint of HGD or EAC, annual progression rates were significantly lower among patients with SSBE (0.29%) compared to compared to LSBE (0.91%) (P < .001). This effect persisted in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18-0.57; P < .001). CONCLUSION: We analyzed progression of BE (length ≥1 cm) to HGD or EAC in a large cohort of patients seen at multiple centers and followed for a median 6.4 years. We found a lower annual rate of progression of SSBE to EAC (0.07%/year) than of LSBE (0.25%/year). We propose lengthening current surveillance intervals for patients with SSBE.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Self-directed Versus In-Classroom Education of Narrow Band Imaging in Diagnosing Colorectal Polyps Using the NICE Criteria.

BACKGROUND: The optimal method for teaching NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE) criteria to medical trainees is unknown. METHODS: Trainees (medical students, residents, and gastroenterology fellows) were randomized to 2 groups (in-classroom vs. self-directed training). Teaching phase: A standardized presentation was developed about narrow band imaging (NBI) and NICE criteria. The in-class teaching group attended a single live-teaching session (with NBI expert). The self-directed training group was provided with the same educational tool with recorded audio. Testing phase: All participants provided their predicted histology and their level of confidence. After completing initial 10 clips, the in-class teaching group received live feedback (NBI expert), whereas the self-teaching group received automated audio feedback. All participants then reviewed the next 30 NBI videos. The diagnostic performance of NBI in predicting histology was compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Twenty medical trainees (8 students, 8 residents, and 4 gastroenterology fellows) participated in the study. The overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value in using NBI to predict histology were: 79.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 76.2-81.8], 69.5% (95% CI, 65.0-74.0), 88.5% (95% CI, 85.3-91.6), and 74.4% (95% CI, 70.4-78.3). There were no significant differences in the performance characteristics between the in-classroom and self-directed groups for all responses including those answered with high confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Using a standardized educational tool, the accuracy of distinguishing adenomatous versus hyperplastic colon polyps using NBI between the in-class teaching and self-directed learning were similar. This suggests that both training methods can be utilized for the education of medical trainees in the use of NICE criteria.

Validation of Probe-based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (pCLE) Criteria for Diagnosing Colon Polyp Histology.

BACKGROUND: Validated probe-based confocal endomicroscopy (pCLE) criteria for distinguishing hyperplastic polyps (HPs) and tubular adenomas (TA) have not yet been developed. AIM: To develop pCLE criteria for distinguishing HP from TA and evaluate its performance characteristics among experts. METHODS: pCLE criteria for colon polyp histology were developed and tested in 2 phases prospectively. Phase I: 8 preliminary criteria were developed and tested internally. Criteria achieving an accuracy of >75% (epithelial surface: regular vs. irregular; goblet cells: increased vs. decreased; gland axis: horizontal vs. vertical; gland shape: slit/stellate vs. villiform; image scale: gray vs. dark) were evaluated in Phase II of study wherein external assessors evaluated these criteria in a separate set of pCLE videos. Accuracy and interobserver agreement (95% confidence intervals) were determined for colon histology prediction. RESULTS: Phase I (criteria development/internal testing): 8 criteria were assessed by 4 pCLE experts using 28 videos (14 HP/14 TA). Five of 8 pCLE criteria met selection for phase II (accuracy >75%). Phase II (external validation): 36 pCLE colon polyp videos (HP 16/TA 20) were evaluated by 8 external assessors. Overall accuracy in diagnosis of colon polyp histology was 84.9% (95% confidence interval, 81.7-87.7). Of predictions made with high confidence (75%), histology was predicted with an accuracy of 91%, sensitivity 83%, specificity 100%, negative predictive value 87% and positive predictive value 98%. Interobserver agreement was substantial (κ=0.73). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the development and validation of pCLE criteria for prediction of colon polyp histology. Using these criteria, overall accuracy in differentiating TA from HP was high with substantial interobserver agreement.

Development and Validation of a Model to Determine Risk of Progression of Barrett's Esophagus to Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A system is needed to determine the risk of patients with Barrett's esophagus for progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We developed and validated a model to determine of progression to HGD or EAC in patients with BE, based on demographic data and endoscopic and histologic findings at the time of index endoscopy. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal study of patients with BE at 5 centers in United States and 1 center in Netherlands enrolled in the Barrett's Esophagus Study database from 1985 through 2014. Patients were excluded from the analysis if they had less than 1 year of follow-up, were diagnosed with HGD or EAC within the past year, were missing baseline histologic data, or had no intestinal metaplasia. Seventy percent of the patients were used to derive the model and 30% were used for the validation study. The primary outcome was development of HGD or EAC during the follow-up period (median, 5.9 years). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. We assigned a specific number of points to each BE risk factor, and point totals (scores) were used to create categories of low, intermediate, and high risk. We used Cox regression to compute hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals to determine associations between risk of progression and scores. RESULTS: Of 4584 patients in the database, 2697 were included in our analysis (84.1% men; 87.6% Caucasian; mean age, 55.4 ± 20.1 years; mean body mass index, 27.9 ± 5.5 kg/m2; mean length of BE, 3.7 ± 3.2 cm). During the follow-up period, 154 patients (5.7%) developed HGD or EAC, with an annual rate of progression of 0.95%. Male sex, smoking, length of BE, and baseline-confirmed low-grade dysplasia were significantly associated with progression. Scores assigned identified patients with BE that progressed to HGD or EAC with a c-statistic of 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.80; P < .001). The calibration slope was 0.9966 (P = .99), determined from the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a scoring system (Progression in Barrett's Esophagus score) based on male sex, smoking, length of BE, and baseline low-grade dysplasia that identified patients with BE at low, intermediate, and high risk for HGD or EAC. This scoring system might be used in management of patients.

Increased detection of Barrett's esophagus-associated neoplasia using wide-area trans-epithelial sampling: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS) with computer-assisted 3-dimensional analysis is a sampling technique that combines abrasive brushing of the Barrett's esophagus (BE) mucosa followed by neural network analysis to highlight abnormal-appearing cells. METHODS: We performed a randomized trial of referred BE patients undergoing surveillance at 16 medical centers. Subjects received either biopsy sampling followed by WATS or WATS followed by biopsy sampling. The primary outcome was rate of detection of high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (HGD/EAC) using WATS in conjunction with biopsy sampling compared with biopsy sampling alone using standard histopathologic criteria. Secondary aims included evaluating neoplasia detection rates based on the procedure order (WATS vs biopsy sampling first), of each procedure separately, and the additional time required for WATS. RESULTS: One hundred sixty patients (mean age, 63.4 years; 76% men; 95% white) completed the trial. The median circumferential and maximal BE extents were 1.0 cm (interquartile range: .0-5.0) and 4.0 cm (interquartile range, 2.0-8.0), respectively. The diagnostic yield for biopsy sampling alone was as follows: HGD/EAC, 7 (4.4%); low-grade dysplasia (LGD), 28 (17.5%); nondysplastic BE (NDBE), 106 (66.25%); and no BE, 19 (11.9%). The addition of WATS to biopsy sampling yielded an additional 23 cases of HGD/EAC (absolute increase, 14.4%; 95% confidence interval, 7.5%-21.2%). Among these 23 patients, 11 were classified by biopsy sampling as NDBE and 12 as LGD/indefinite for dysplasia (IND); 14 received biopsy sampling first and 9 WATS first (not significant) and most (n = 21; 91.7%) had a prior dysplasia history. WATS added an average of 4.5 minutes to the procedure. CONCLUSION: Results of this multicenter, prospective, randomized trial demonstrate that the use of WATS in a referral BE population increases the detection of HGD/EAC. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03008980.).

Impact of cap-assisted colonoscopy on detection of proximal colon adenomas: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Proximal colon adenomas can be missed during routine colonoscopy. Use of a cap or hood on the tip of the colonoscope has been shown to improve overall adenoma detection with variable rates. However, it has not been systematically evaluated for detection of proximal colon or right-sided adenomas where the cap may have maximum impact on adenoma detection rate (ADR). Our aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of cap-assisted colonoscopy (CC) on right-sided ADRs (r-ADRs) compared with standard colonoscopy (SC). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases as well as secondary sources (bibliographic review of selected articles and major GI proceedings) were searched through October 1, 2016. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of r-ADR. Detection of flat adenoma, sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), and number of right-sided adenomas per patient were also assessed. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effect models. RESULTS: We screened 686 records and analyzed data from 4 studies (CC group, 2546 patients; SC group, 2547 patients) that met criteria for determination of r-ADRs, whereas 6 studies (CC group, 3159 patients; SC group, 3137 patients) were analyzed to estimate right-sided adenomas per patient. r-ADR was significantly higher with CC compared with SC (23% vs 17%; OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.08-2.05; I2 = 79%; P = .01). CC also improved detection rates of flat adenoma (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.35-3.20; P < .01) and SSA/P (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74; P = .04). The total number of right-sided adenomas (CC: 1428 [60%] vs SC: 1127 [58%]) and number of right-sided adenomas per patient (CC, .71 ± .5, vs SC, .65 ± .62 [mean ± standard deviation]) were numerically higher for CC but were not statistically significant (P = .43). Approximately 17 CCs would be required to detect an additional patient with right-sided adenoma. CONCLUSIONS: Use of CC significantly improves the proximal colon ADR. In addition, flat adenoma and serrated colonic lesion detection rates are also significantly higher as compared with SC.

Low Risk of High-Grade Dysplasia or Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Among Patients With Barrett's Esophagus Less Than 1 cm (Irregular Z Line) Within 5 Years of Index Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many patients with a < 1 cm segment of columnar metaplasia in the distal esophagus, also called an irregular Z line, are encountered. These patients, often referred to as patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), are enrolled in surveillance programs. However, little is known about their risk of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to determine the incidence of HGD and EAC in patients with irregular Z line with intestinal metaplasia. METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter cohort study of patients who underwent endoscopic examination for BE at tertiary care referral centers in the United States and Europe. We analyzed data from 1791 patients (mean age, 56 ± 17 years) found to have non-dysplastic BE at the index endoscopy and after 1 year or more of follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 5.9 years (interquartile range, 3.1-8.3 years). We calculated rates of progression to HGD or EAC between groups of patients with irregular Z line (n = 167) and those with BE of ≥ 1 cm (n = 1624). RESULTS: A higher proportion of patients in the irregular Z-line group were female (26.3%) than in the BE group (14.8% female BE) (P <.001). A lower proportion of patients in the irregular Z-line group were smokers (33.5%) than in the BE group (52.6% smokers). None of the patients with irregular Z line developed HGD or EAC during a median follow-up period of 4.8 years (interquartile range, 3.2-8.3 years). All 71 incident cases of HGD or EAC developed in patients with BE of ≥1 cm in length. On multivariate analysis, patients with irregular Z line and patients with BE of ≥ 1 cm did not differ significantly in age, race, or duration of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective, multicenter cohort study, we found that patients with irregular Z line do not develop HGD or esophageal cancer within 5 years after index endoscopy.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of multimodal endoscopic eradication therapy in Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia: a systematic review and pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Focal EMR followed by radiofrequency ablation (f-EMR + RFA) and stepwise or complete EMR (s-EMR) are established strategies for eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC)/intramucosal carcinoma (IMC). The objective of this study was to derive pooled rates of efficacy and safety of individual methods in a large cohort of patients with BE and to indirectly compare the 2 methods. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and major conference proceedings were searched. A systematic review and pooled analysis were carried out to determine the following outcomes in patients with BE undergoing either f-EMR + RFA or s-EMR: (1) complete eradication rates of neoplasia (CE-N) and intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM); (2) recurrence rates of cancer (EAC), dysplasia, and IM; (3) incidence rates of adverse events. Mixed logistic regression was performed as an exploratory analysis to examine differences in outcomes between the 2 methods. RESULTS: Nine studies (774 patients) of f-EMR + RFA and 11 studies (751 patients) of s-EMR were included. Patients undergoing f-EMR + RFA had high BE eradication rates (CE-N, 93.4%; CE-IM, 73.1%), whereas strictures occurred in 10.2%, bleeding in 1.1%, and perforations in 0.2% of patients. Recurrence of EAC, dysplasia, and IM was 1.4%, 2.6%, and 16.1%, respectively, in this group. Patients undergoing s-EMR also showed high BE eradication rates (CE-N, 94.9%; CE-IM, 79.6%) but a higher rate of adverse events (strictures in 33.5%, bleeding in 7.5%, and perforation in 1.3%). Recurrence of EAC, dysplasia, and IM was 0.7%, 3.3%, and 12.1%, respectively, in the s-EMR group. Mixed logistic regression showed that patients undergoing s-EMR might be more likely to develop esophageal strictures (odds ratio [OR], 4.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.61-13.85; P = .005), perforation (OR, 7.00; 95% CI, 1.56-31.33; P = .01), and bleeding (OR, 6.88; 95% CI, 2.19-21.62; P = 0.001) compared with f-EMR + RFA. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HGD/EAC, f-EMR followed by RFA seems to be equally effective as and safer than s-EMR.

Discordance Among Pathologists in the United States and Europe in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Dysplasia for Patients With Barrett's Esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is suboptimal inter-observer agreement, even among expert gastrointestinal pathologists, in the diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). We analyzed histopathologic criteria required for a diagnosis of LGD using the new subcategories of LGD with inflammatory and dysplastic features. We categorized each diagnosis based on the level of confidence and assessed inter-observer agreement among gastrointestinal pathologists from 5 tertiary centers in the United States and Europe. METHODS: In the first phase of the study, 3 pathologists held a consensus conference at which they discussed the diagnostic criteria for LGD. In the second phase, 79 slides from patients with BE (23 samples of non-dysplastic BE, 22 samples of LGD, and 34 samples of high-grade dysplasia) were identified, randomly assigned to 7 pathologists (4 from the United States and 3 from Europe), and interpreted in a blinded fashion. κ Values were calculated for inter-observer agreement. We performed multinomial logistic regression analysis to assess the weighting of histologic features with the diagnosis. RESULTS: The overall κ value for diagnosis was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.48). When categorized based on degree of dysplasia, the κ value was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.11-0.29) for non-dysplastic BE, 0.11 (95% CI, 0.004-0.15) for LGD, and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.36-0.46) for high-grade dysplasia. When all pathologists made a diagnosis with high confidence, the inter-observer agreement was substantial among the US pathologists (κ, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.61-0.66) and European pathologists (κ, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.97). The κ values for all diagnoses made by European pathologists were higher than those made by US pathologists. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of criteria used in histopathologic diagnosis of LGD, we did not observe improvement in level of agreement among experienced pathologists, even after accounting for inflammation. The level of inter-observer agreement increased with level of pathologist confidence. There was also a difference in reading of histopathology samples of BE tissues between US and European pathologists.