Safety and Acceptability of Esophageal Cytosponge Cell Collection Device in a Pooled Analysis of Data From Individual Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Diagnosis and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have become emerging public health issues. Cytosponge is a novel, minimally invasive esophageal cell collection device. We aimed to assess the data on safety and acceptability of this device. METHODS: We performed a patient-level review of 5 prospective trials assessing Cytosponge performance in patients with reflux disease, BE and EoE in primary and secondary care. Acceptability of Cytosponge and subsequent endoscopy were recorded with visual analogue scale (VAS), wherein 0 and 10 denoted lowest and highest acceptability. Median VAS scores were compared using a Mann-Whitney test. The number of attempts, failures in swallowing the device and occurrence of adverse events were analyzed. Risk factors for failure in swallowing were analyzed using a multivariate regression model. RESULTS: In total, 2672 Cytosponge procedures were performed, in 2418 individuals from 2008 through 2017. There were 2 adverse events related to the device: a minor pharyngeal bleed and a case of detachment (<1:2000). The median acceptability score for the Cytosponge was 6.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 5.0-8.0), which was higher than the score for endoscopy without sedation (median 5.0; IQR, 3.0-7.0; P < .001) and lower than the score for endoscopy with sedation (median 8.0; IQR, 5.0-9.0; P < .001). Nearly all patients (91.1%) successfully swallowed the Cytosponge, most on the first attempt (90.1%). Failure to swallow the device was more likely to occur in secondary care (odds ratio, 5.13; 95% CI, 1.48-17.79; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The Cytosponge test is a safe procedure with good acceptability ratings in a variety of health care settings.

Comparative outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's oesophagus with different baseline histology.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is currently recommended for dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus (BO); however, there are limited data on treatment response when stratified by baseline histology. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to evaluate RFA outcomes and durability for BO with different baseline histology. METHODS: Patients treated with RFA between 2007 and 2017 at a single institution were retrospectively included. Outcome measures were: (a) complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) and intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) at 18 months, (b) complication rate and (c) durability of CRD and CRIM. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients underwent RFA, of whom 113 completed the treatment protocol (21 low-grade dysplasia (LGD), 46 high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and 46 intramucosal carcinoma (IMC)). CRD and CRIM were achieved in 94.7% and 78.8% of patients, respectively. When stratified by baseline histology, there was no significant difference in CRD between groups (LGD, 95.2%; HGD, 95.7%; and IMC, 93.5%; p = 0.89). Similarly, there was no significant difference in CRIM between groups (LGD, 71.4%; HGD, 76.1% and IMC, 87.0%; p = 0.39). CRD and CRIM durability at 24 months for LGD, HGD and IMC were 100%, 97.7% and 100% (log rank p = 0.31), and 100%, 89.0% and 95.5%, respectively (log rank p = 0.62). CONCLUSION: Baseline histology is not a predictor of RFA response. Once CRD and CRIM are achieved, these effects are durable over time.