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).

Dutch-Flemish translation and validation of the gastrointestinal symptom scales from the patient­reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS)®.

PURPOSE: To translate the eight PROMIS® GastrointestinaI Symptom Scales into Dutch-Flemish and to evaluate their psychometric properties. METHODS: This study consisted of two parts: (1) translation according to the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation methodology and (2) evaluation of psychometric properties: structural validity, using confirmatory factor analysis; and construct validity using hypothesis testing. RESULTS: In the first part of the study, in 19 out of the 77 items (24.7%) translation was challenging. After discussion between the translators, consensus could be achieved. In the cognitive debriefing interview phase, ten minor changes in the wording of items were made. A universal Dutch-Flemish translation for all 77 items was obtained. In de second part of the study a good fit was found for three DF-PROMIS GI Scales: Bowel Incontinence, Gas and Bloating, and Belly Pain. Four scales (Reflux, Disrupted Swallowing, Diarrhea, and Constipation) did not show sufficient fit and fit for the Nausea and Vomiting scale could not be assessed because of skewed responses. Construct validity was considered sufficient for six out of eight DF-PROMIS GI Scales. Less than 75% of hypothesis for de Constipation and Disrupted Swallowing scales could be confirmed. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS GI Symptom Scales were successfully translated into DutchFlemish. The findings suggest a sufficient structural validity for the PROMIS GI Scales. Bowel Incontinence, Gas and Bloating and Belly Pain. Construct validity was sufficient for the Scales Gas and Bloating, Incontinence, Nausea and Vomiting, Reflux, Belly Pain, and Diarrhea.

Prospective multicentre study of indications for surgery in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis following endoscopic ultrasonography (PICUS).

BACKGROUND: Cholecystectomy in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) is controversial. A randomized trial found cholecystectomy to reduce the recurrence rate of IAP but did not include preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). As EUS is effective in detecting gallstone disease, cholecystectomy may be indicated only in patients with gallstone disease. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic value of EUS in patients with IAP, and the rate of recurrent pancreatitis in patients in whom EUS could not determine the aetiology (EUS-negative IAP). METHODS: This prospective multicentre cohort study included patients with a first episode of IAP who underwent outpatient EUS. The primary outcome was detection of aetiology by EUS. Secondary outcomes included adverse events after EUS, recurrence of pancreatitis, and quality of life during 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: After screening 957 consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from 24 centres, 105 patients with IAP were included and underwent EUS. In 34 patients (32 per cent), EUS detected an aetiology: (micro)lithiasis and biliary sludge (23.8 per cent), chronic pancreatitis (6.7 per cent), and neoplasms (2.9 per cent); 2 of the latter patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy. During 1-year follow-up, the pancreatitis recurrence rate was 17 per cent (12 of 71) among patients with EUS-negative IAP versus 6 per cent (2 of 34) among those with positive EUS. Recurrent pancreatitis was associated with poorer quality of life. CONCLUSION: EUS detected an aetiology in a one-third of patients with a first episode of IAP, requiring mostly cholecystectomy or pancreatoduodenectomy. The role of cholecystectomy in patients with EUS-negative IAP remains uncertain and warrants further study.

Some patients develop acute inflammation of the pancreas without a clear cause. These patients have a high risk of developing more episodes of acute inflammation of the pancreas. Potentially, such inflammation could be caused by tiny gallstones that physicians are not able to detect. If this is true, these patients may also benefit from surgical removal of the gallbladder. However, this is still controversial. Endoscopic ultrasonography is a diagnostic procedure during which a physician looks at the gallbladder and bile ducts in detail via a small ultrasound probe inserted through the mouth. This endoscopic ultrasonography may be able to detect gallstones better than physicians were able to previously. This study tested the value of endoscopic ultrasonography, and the number of patients who developed more episodes of acute inflammation after endoscopic ultrasonography was recorded. Some 106 patients with acute inflammation of the pancreas for the first time without a clear cause participated and were offered endoscopic ultrasonography. The number of times endoscopic ultrasonography found a cause for the acute inflammation was recorded, as well as safety parameters, number of patients who developed more episodes of acute inflammation, and quality of life. After screening 957 patients, 105 ultimately underwent endoscopic ultrasonography. A cause was found in one-third of patients. This was mostly (tiny) gallstones, but chronic inflammation and even tumours were found. These patients were mostly treated surgically for their gallstones and tumours. In the first year after the first acute episode of inflammation, the inflammation came back at least once in almost one in six patients in whom endoscopic ultrasonography did not find a cause. This occurred less in patients in whom a cause was found; the inflammation came back in 1 in 16 of these patients. It was also found that having inflammation coming back negatively affected quality of life. In this study, endoscopic ultrasonography was able to detect a cause in one-third of patients with first-time acute inflammation of the pancreas. In one in four patients, this cause could be treated by a surgical procedure. Whether surgical removal of the gallbladder can be helpful in patients in whom endoscopic ultrasonography is not able to detect an aetiology should be investigated in further studies.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy versus surgical gastrojejunostomy for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (ENDURO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a debilitating condition that frequently occurs in patients with malignancies of the distal stomach and (peri)ampullary region. The standard palliative treatment for patients with a reasonable life expectancy and adequate performance status is a laparoscopic surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ). Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) emerged as a promising alternative to the surgical approach. The present study aims to compare these treatment modalities in terms of efficacy, safety, and costs. METHODS: The ENDURO-study is a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. In total, ninety-six patients with gastric outlet obstruction caused by an irresectable or metastasized malignancy will be 1:1 randomized to either SGJ or EUS-GE. The primary endpoint is time to tolerate at least soft solids. The co-primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with persisting or recurring symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction for which a reintervention is required. Secondary endpoints are technical and clinical success, quality of life, gastroenterostomy dysfunction, reinterventions, time to reintervention, adverse events, quality of life, time to start chemotherapy, length of hospital stay, readmissions, weight, survival, and costs. DISCUSSION: The ENDURO-study assesses whether EUS-GE, as compared to SGJ, results in a faster resumption of solid oral intake and is non-inferior regarding reinterventions for persistent or recurrent obstructive symptoms in patients with malignant GOO. This trial aims to guide future treatment strategies and to improve quality of life in a palliative setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP): NL9592. Registered on 07 July 2021.

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition prior to resection of pancreatic carcinoma: a nationwide analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasonography guided tissue acquisition (EUS + TA) is used to provide a tissue diagnosis in patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. Key performance indicators (KPI) for these procedures are rate of adequate sample (RAS) and sensitivity for malignancy (SFM). AIM: assess practice variation regarding KPI of EUS + TA prior to resection of pancreatic carcinoma in the Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Results of all EUS + TA prior to resection of pancreatic carcinoma from 2014-2018, were extracted from the national Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA). Pathology reports were classified as: insufficient for analysis (b1), benign (b2), atypia (b3), neoplastic other (b4), suspected malignant (b5), and malignant (b6). RAS was defined as the proportion of EUS procedures yielding specimen sufficient for analysis. SFM was calculated using a strict definition (malignant only, SFM-b6), and a broader definition (SFM-b5+6). RESULTS: 691 out of 1638 resected patients (42%) underwent preoperative EUS + TA. RAS was 95% (range 89-100%), SFM-b6 was 44% (20-77%), and SFM-b5+6 was 65% (53-90%). All centers met the performance target RAS>85%. Only 9 out of 17 met the performance target SFM-b5+6 > 85%. CONCLUSION: This nationwide study detected significant practice variation regarding KPI of EUS + TA procedures prior to surgical resection of pancreatic carcinoma. Therefore, quality improvement of EUS + TA is indicated.

Hospital practice variation in the proportion of patients with esophagogastric cancer discussed during an expert multidisciplinary team meeting.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) and especially MDTMs in which expert centres are involved (expert MDTMs) are a key element in adequate cancer care. However, variation among hospitals in the proportion of patients presented during an expert MDTM has been described. This study aims to investigate national practice variation in the proportion of patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer being discussed during an expert MDTM. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with oesophageal or gastric cancer in 2018-2019 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 6,921). Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to analyse the association between patient, and tumour characteristics, and the probability to be discussed in an expert MDTM. Variation was analysed according to the hospital and region of diagnosis for: all patients, patients with a potentially curable (cT1-4A cTX, any cN, cM0) or incurable tumour stage (cT4b and/or cM1). RESULTS: In total, 79% of patients were discussed during an expert MDTM, of whom 84% (n = 3,424) and 71% (n = 2,018) with potentially curable, or incurable oesophageal or gastric cancer, respectively. The proportion of patients discussed during an expert MDTM ranged from 54% to 98%, and 17% to 100% between hospitals for potentially curable and incurable patients, respectively (all p < 0.0001). Adjusted analyses showed significant hospital (all p < 0.0001), but no regional variation regarding the patients discussed during an expert MDTM. CONCLUSION: For patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer the probability of being discussed during an expert MDTM varies considerably according to the hospital of diagnosis.

Overuse and Misuse of Antibiotics and the Clinical Consequence in Necrotizing Pancreatitis: An Observational Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The use and impact of antibiotics and the impact of causative pathogens on clinical outcomes in a large real-world cohort covering the entire clinical spectrum of necrotizing pancreatitis remain unknown. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: International guidelines recommend broad-spectrum antibiotics in patients with suspected infected necrotizing pancreatitis. This recommendation is not based on high-level evidence and clinical effects are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort of 401 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis in 15 Dutch centers (2010-2019). Across the patient population from the time of admission to 6 months postadmission, multivariable regression analyses were used to analyze (1) microbiological cultures and (2) antibiotic use. RESULTS: Antibiotics were started in 321/401 patients (80%) administered at a median of 5 days (P25-P75: 1-13) after admission. The median duration of antibiotics was 27 days (P25-P75: 15-48). In 221/321 patients (69%) infection was not proven by cultures at the time of initiation of antibiotics. Empirical antibiotics for infected necrosis provided insufficient coverage in 64/128 patients (50%) with a pancreatic culture. Prolonged antibiotic therapy was associated with Enterococcus infection (OR 1.08 [95% CI 1.03-1.16], P =0.01). Enterococcus infection was associated with new/persistent organ failure (OR 3.08 [95% CI 1.35-7.29], P <0.01) and mortality (OR 5.78 [95% CI 1.46-38.73], P =0.03). Yeast was found in 30/147 cultures (20%). DISCUSSION: In this nationwide study of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, the vast majority received antibiotics, typically administered early in the disease course and without a proven infection. Empirical antibiotics were inappropriate based on pancreatic cultures in half the patients. Future clinical research and practice must consider antibiotic selective pressure due to prolonged therapy and coverage of Enterococcus and yeast. Improved guidelines on antimicrobial diagnostics and therapy could reduce inappropriate antibiotic use and improve clinical outcomes.

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).

Comparison of lumen-apposing metal stents versus double-pigtail plastic stents for infected necrotising pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are believed to clinically improve endoscopic transluminal drainage of infected necrosis when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents. However, comparative data from prospective studies are very limited. DESIGN: Patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, who underwent an endoscopic step-up approach with LAMS within a multicentre prospective cohort study were compared with the data of 51 patients in the randomised TENSION trial who had been assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach with double-pigtail plastic stents. The clinical study protocol was otherwise identical for both groups. Primary end point was the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. Secondary end points included mortality, major complications, hospital stay and healthcare costs. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients were treated with LAMS in 16 hospitals during 27 months. The need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy was 64% (n=34) and was not different from the previous trial using plastic stents (53%, n=27)), also after correction for baseline characteristics (OR 1.21 (95% CI 0.45 to 3.23)). Secondary end points did not differ between groups either, which also included bleeding requiring intervention-5 patients (9%) after LAMS placement vs 11 patients (22%) after placement of plastic stents (relative risk 0.44; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.17). Total healthcare costs were also comparable (mean difference -€6348, bias-corrected and accelerated 95% CI -€26 386 to €10 121). CONCLUSION: Our comparison of two patient groups from two multicentre prospective studies with a similar design suggests that LAMS do not reduce the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis. Also, the rate of bleeding complications was comparable.

Barrett Esophagus: Quality of life and factors associated with illness perception.

BACKGROUND: Health-related Quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), a premalignant condition, may be influenced by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms and the risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We aim to investigate HRQoL in non-dysplastic Barrett Esophagus (NDBE) patients, identify factors associated with a negative illness perception of the diagnosis BE and compare outcomes between patients treated in a specialized BE center with non-expert centers. In this multi-center cross-sectional study, HRQoL of NDBE patients were assessed using the Short Form 36, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer worry Scale, and Reflux Disease Questionnaire. A multivariable, linear regression analysis was conducted to assess factors associated with illness perception (Illness perception scale) of the BE diagnosis. Outcome parameters of patients from expert centers were compared to non-expert centers. RESULTS: A total of 859 NDBE patients (mean age 63.6% and 74.5% male), of which 640 from BE expert centers were included. BE patients scored similar or higher means (i.e. better) on generic HRQoL in comparison with a Dutch norm population. The multivariable regression model showed that cancer worry, GERD symptoms, signs of anxiety and depression, and female gender were associated with a negative illness perception of BE. GERD symptoms were reported in the minority (22.4%) of BE patients. Levels of anxiety symptoms were comparable to a Dutch norm population (mean 3.7 vs. 3.9 p 0.183) and lower for depression symptoms (mean 6.8 vs. 7.6 p < 0.001). Overall, there were no differences found on outcomes between expert centers and non-expert centers. CONCLUSION: NDBE patients scored similar or better on generic HRQoL, anxiety and depression than an age and gender matched norm population. The presence of cancer worry, gastrointestinal symptoms, anxiety and depression, and female gender are factors associated with a negative illness perception of the diagnosis BE.

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.

Analysis of metastases rates during follow-up after endoscopic resection of early "high-risk" esophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: After endoscopic resection (ER) of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), the optimal management of patients with high-risk histologic features for lymph node metastases (ie, submucosal invasion, poor differentiation grade, or lymphovascular invasion) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of endoscopic follow-up after ER for high-risk EAC. METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study, data were collected from all Dutch patients managed with endoscopic follow-up (endoscopy, EUS) after ER for high-risk EAC between 2008 and 2019. We distinguished 3 groups: intramucosal cancers with high-risk features, submucosal cancers with low-risk features, and submucosal cancers with high-risk features. The primary outcome was the annual risk for metastases during follow-up, stratified for baseline histology. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients met the selection criteria. Median follow-up was 29 months (interquartile range, 15-48). Metastases were observed in 5 of 25 (annual risk, 6.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-15) high-risk intramucosal cancers, 1 of 55 (annual risk, .7%; 95% CI, 0-4.0) low-risk submucosal cancers, and 3 of 40 (annual risk, 3.0%; 95% CI, 0-7.0) high-risk submucosal cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas the annual metastasis rate for high-risk submucosal EAC (3.0%) was somewhat lower than expected in comparison with previous reported percentages, the annual metastasis rate of 6.9% for high-risk intramucosal EAC is new and worrisome. This calls for further prospective studies and suggests that strict follow-up of this small subgroup is warranted until prospective data are available.

Development and External Validation of a Model to Predict Complex Treatment After Radiofrequency Ablation for Barrett's Esophagus With Early Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is safe and leads to complete eradication in the majority of patients. However, a subgroup will experience a more complex treatment course with a risk for failure or disease progression. Early identification of these patients may improve patient counseling and treatment outcomes. We aimed to develop a prognostic model for a complex treatment course. METHODS: We collected data from a nationwide registry that captures outcomes for all patients undergoing endoscopic eradication therapy for early BE neoplasia. A complex treatment course was defined as neoplastic progression, treatment failure, or the need for endoscopic resection during the radiofrequency ablation treatment phase. We developed a prognostic model using logistic regression. We externally validated our model in an independent registry. RESULTS: A total of 1386 patients were included, of whom 78 (6%) had a complex treatment course. Our model identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer with a visible lesion containing high-grade dysplasia/cancer, and patients with less than 50% squamous conversion after radiofrequency ablation were identified as high risk for a complex treatment. This applied to 8% of the study population and included 93% of all treatment failures and 76% of all patients with advanced neoplastic progression. The model appeared robust in multiple sensitivity analyses and performed well in external validation (area under the curve, 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a prognostic model that identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma and those with poor squamous regeneration as high risk for a complex treatment course. The good performance in external validation suggests that it may be used in clinical management (Netherlands Trial Register: NL7039).

Impact of expert center endoscopic assessment of confirmed low grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus diagnosed in community hospitals.

BACKGROUND : The optimal management for patients with low grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is unclear. According to the Dutch national guideline, all patients with LGD with histological confirmation of the diagnosis by an expert pathologist (i. e. "confirmed LGD"), are referred for a dedicated re-staging endoscopy at an expert center. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of re-staging endoscopy by an expert endoscopist for patients with confirmed LGD. METHODS : This retrospective cohort study included all patients with flat BE diagnosed in a community hospital who had confirmed LGD and were referred to one of the nine Barrett Expert Centers (BECs) in the Netherlands. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with prevalent high grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer during re-staging in a BEC. RESULTS : Of the 248 patients with confirmed LGD, re-staging in the BEC revealed HGD or cancer in 23 % (57/248). In 79 % (45/57), HGD or cancer in a newly detected visible lesion was diagnosed. Of the remaining patients, re-staging in the BEC showed a second diagnosis of confirmed LGD in 68 % (168/248), while the remaining 9 % (23/248) had nondysplastic BE. CONCLUSION : One quarter of patients with apparent flat BE with confirmed LGD diagnosed in a community hospital had prevalent HGD or cancer after re-staging at an expert center. This endorses the advice to refer patients with confirmed LGD, including in the absence of visible lesions, to an expert center for re-staging endoscopy.

Extending treatment criteria for Barrett's neoplasia: results of a nationwide cohort of 138 endoscopic submucosal dissection procedures.

BACKGROUND: The use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is gradually expanding for treatment of neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to report outcomes of all ESDs for BE neoplasia performed in the Netherlands. METHODS: Retrospective assessment of outcomes, using treatment and follow-up data from a joint database. RESULTS: 130/138 patients had complete ESDs, with 126/130 (97 %) en bloc resections. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) procedure time was 121 minutes (90-180). Pathology findings were high grade dysplasia (HGD) (5 %) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) T1a (43 %) or T1b (52 %; 19 % sm1, 33 % ≥ sm2). Among resections of HGD or T1a EAC lesions, 87 % (95 %CI 75 %-92 %) were both en bloc and R0; the corresponding value for T1b EAC lesions was 49 % (36 %-60 %). Among R1 resections, 10/34 (29 %) showed residual cancer, all detected at first endoscopic follow-up. The remaining 24 patients (71 %) showed no residual neoplasia. Six of these patients underwent surgery with no residual tumor; the remaining 18 underwent endoscopic follow-up during median 31 months with 1 local recurrence (annual recurrence rate 2 %). Among R0 resections, annual local recurrence rate during median 27 months was 0.5 %. CONCLUSION: In expert hands, ESD allows safe removal of bulky intraluminal neoplasia and submucosal cancer. ESD of the latter showed R1 resection margins in 50 %, yet only one third had persisting neoplasia at follow-up. To better stratify R1 patients with an indication for additional surgery, repeat endoscopy after healing of the ESD might be a helpful possible prognostic factor for residual cancer.

Incidence and outcomes of poor healing and poor squamous regeneration after radiofrequency ablation therapy for early Barrett's neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic eradication therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is effective in most patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, some patients experience poor healing and/or poor squamous regeneration. We evaluated incidence and treatment outcomes of poor healing and poor squamous regeneration. METHODS: We included all patients treated with RFA for early BE neoplasia from a nationwide Dutch registry based on a joint treatment protocol. Poor healing (active inflammatory changes or visible ulcerations ≥ 3 months post-RFA), poor squamous regeneration (< 50 % squamous regeneration), and treatment success (complete eradication of BE [CE-BE]) were evaluated. RESULTS: 1386 patients (median BE C2M5) underwent RFA with baseline low grade dysplasia (27 %), high grade dysplasia (30 %), or early cancer (43 %). In 134 patients with poor healing (10 %), additional time and acid suppression resulted in complete esophageal healing, and 67/134 (50 %) had normal squamous regeneration with 97 % CE-BE. Overall, 74 patients had poor squamous regeneration (5 %). Compared with patients with normal regeneration, patients with poor squamous regeneration had a higher risk for treatment failure (64 % vs. 2 %, relative risk [RR] 27 [95 % confidence interval [CI] 18-40]) and progression to advanced disease (15 % vs. < 1 %, RR 30 [95 %CI 12-81]). Higher body mass index, longer BE segment, reflux esophagitis, and < 50 % squamous regeneration after baseline endoscopic resection were independently associated with poor squamous regeneration in multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: In half of the patients with poor healing, additional time and acid suppression led to normal squamous regeneration and excellent treatment outcomes. In patients with poor squamous regeneration, however, the risk for treatment failure and progression to advanced disease was significantly increased.

Long-term outcomes after endoscopic treatment for Barrett's neoplasia with radiofrequency ablation ± endoscopic resection: results from the national Dutch database in a 10-year period.

OBJECTIVE: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA)±endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred treatment for early neoplasia in Barrett's oesophagus (BE). We aimed to report short-term and long-term outcomes for all 1384 patients treated in the Netherlands (NL) from 2008 to 2018, with uniform treatment and follow-up (FU) in a centralised setting. DESIGN: Endoscopic therapy for early BE neoplasia in NL is centralised in nine expert centres with specifically trained endoscopists and pathologists that adhere to a joint protocol. Prospectively collected data are registered in a uniform database. Patients with low/high-grade dysplasia or low-risk cancer, were treated by ER of visible lesions followed by trimonthly RFA sessions of any residual BE until complete eradication of BE (CE-BE). Patients with ER alone were not included. RESULTS: After ER (62% of cases; 43% low-risk cancers) and median 1 circumferential and 2 focal RFA (p25-p75 0-1; 1-2) per patient, CE-BE was achieved in 94% (1270/1348). Adverse events occurred in 21% (268/1386), most commonly oesophageal stenosis (15%), all were managed endoscopically. A total of 1154 patients with CE-BE were analysed for long-term outcomes. During median 43 months (22-69) and 4 endoscopies (1-5), 38 patients developed dysplastic recurrence (3%, annual recurrence risk 1%), all were detected as endoscopically visible abnormalities. Random biopsies from a normal appearing cardia showed intestinal metaplasia (IM) in 14% and neoplasia in 0%. A finding of IM in the cardia was reproduced during further FU in only 33%, none progressed to neoplasia. Frequent FU visits in the first year of FU were not associated with recurrence risk. CONCLUSION: In a setting of centralised care, RFA±ER is effective for eradication of Barrett's related neoplasia and has remarkably low rates of dysplastic recurrence. Our data support more lenient FU intervals, with emphasis on careful endoscopic inspection. Random biopsies from neosquamous epithelium and cardia are of questionable value. NETHERLANDS TRIAL REGISTER NUMBER: NL7039.

Factors influencing health-related quality of life in patients with Barrett's esophagus: a qualitative focus group study.

INTRODUCTION: Barrett's esophagus is a premalignant condition in the lower part of the esophagus, caused by gastroesophageal reflux disease. Previous studies found that having a Barrett's esophagus is associated with a significant decrease of health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Over the past decade, a considerable amount of literature has been published on the development of endoscopic treatment for (early) neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus. Though, currently very little is known about the impact of those endoscopic treatments on HRQOL from the perspective of patients. In this study, we aim to assess the factors influencing HRQOL according to Barrett's esophagus patients. METHODS: By using a qualitative focus group design, patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus and patients with a history of endoscopic treatment for Barrett's dysplasia were included. Data were analysed following the conventional content analyses approach. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients participated in the four focus group sessions. Experiencing symptoms was valued as the most important factor in both groups. Other factors identified as important HRQOL influencers were: use of medication, fear of cancer and trust in physicians and endoscopic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: In general, Barrett's esophagus patients experienced a good HRQOL, with a minimal emotional burden from the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus. Most influencing factor on HRQOL was: experiencing reflux and dyspepsia symptoms. This study underlines the importance of adequate gastroesophageal reflux treatment and providing information to Barrett's esophagus patients, tailored to their personal needs.

Lymphovascular invasion quantification could improve risk prediction of lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma.

AIM: To quantify lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and to assess the prognostic value in patients with pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this nationwide, retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they were treated with surgery or endoscopic resection for pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma. Primary endpoint was the presence of metastases, lymph node metastases, or distant metastases, in surgical resection specimens or during follow-up. A prediction model to identify risk factors for metastases was developed and internally validated. RESULTS: 248 patients were included. LVI was distributed as follows: no LVI (n = 196; 79.0%), 1 LVI focus (n = 16; 6.5%), 2-3 LVI foci (n = 21; 8.5%) and ≥4 LVI foci (n = 15; 6.0%). Seventy-eight patients had metastases. The risk of metastases was increased for tumors with 2-3 LVI foci [subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) 3.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.10-5.47] and ≥4 LVI foci (SHR 3.81, 95% CI 2.37-6.10). The prediction model demonstrated a good discriminative ability (c-statistic 0.81). CONCLUSION: The risk of metastases is higher when more LVI foci are present. Quantification of LVI could be useful for a more precise risk estimation of metastases. This model needs to be externally validated before implementation into clinical practice.