Improving clinical outcomes of Barrett's esophagus with high dose proton pump inhibitors and cryoablation.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence has increased significantly despite surveillance endoscopy for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and gastric acid supression medications. This prospective, cohort study's aims were to determine the long-term efficacy of proton-pump inhibitors twice daily (PPI-BID) with cryotherapy (CRYO) for complete ablation of BE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive BE patients were managed with a PPI-BID, CRYO ablation, follow-up protocol. Primary outcomes were to determine complete ablation rate of intestinal metaplasia (IM) or dysplasia/carcinoma, and factors affecting recurrence. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were enrolled: advanced disease (11%), low-grade or indefinite dysplasia (26%), non-dysplastic BE (63%). In 58 completing CRYO, eradication was confirmed in 100% on surveillance endoscopy. Adverse events (5%) were minor (mild pain 4%). IM recurred in 9% after a mean of 52 months, all successfully re-ablated. No second recurrence occurred. The primary predictor of recurrence was noncompliance with PPI-BID. BE or cardia IM recurred in 35% of those taking proton pump inhibitors once daily or less compared with 0% in those on PPI-BID or dexlansoprazole daily (p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Minimizing acid reflux with at least PPI-BID combined with CRYO ablation appears to be the optimal cost-effective and safe BE treatment for any stage to minimize progression to adenocarcinoma by addressing both the stimulus that causes BE and the presence of goblet cells.

Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) has not made any clear impact on incidence of or mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma.After cost-effective, safe cryoablation of BE, continued effective acid-reflux control with high-dose proton pump inhibitors is critical to minimize recurrence or progression.Risk factors and costs will define methods and frequency of limited surveillance after ablation of BE.

Cancer of the Pancreas-Actual 5, 10, and 20+Year Survival: The Lucky and Fortunate Few.

Cancer of the pancreas (CaP) is a dismal, uncommon, systemic malignancy. This article updates an earlier experience of actual long-term survival of CaP in patients treated between 1991 to 2000, and reviews the literature. Survival is expressed as actual, not projected, survival.

Plastic versus self-expanding metallic stents for malignant hilar biliary obstruction: a prospective multicenter observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There are few comparative data as to whether plastic or self-expanding metallic stents are preferable for palliating malignant hilar biliary obstruction. METHODS: Thirty-day outcomes of consecutive endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies performed for malignant hilar obstruction at 6 private and 5 university centers were assessed prospectively. RESULTS: Patients receiving plastic (N=28) and metallic stents (N=34) were similar except that metallic stent recipients more often had: Bismuth III or IV tumors (16/34 vs. 5/28 P=0.043), higher Charlson comorbidity scores (P=0.003), metastatic disease (P=0.006), and management at academic centers (P=0.018). The groups had similar rates of bilateral stent placement (4/28 vs. 5/34), and similar frequency of opacified but undrained segmental ducts (7/28 vs. 5/34). Adverse outcomes including cholangitis, stent occlusion, migration, perforation, and/or the need for unplanned endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography occurred in 11/28 (39.3%) patients with plastic versus 4/34 (11.8%) with metal stents (P=0.017). By logistic regression, factors associated with adverse outcomes included plastic stent placement (odds ratio 6.32; 95% confidence interval 1.23, 32.56) and serum bilirubin (1.11/mg/dL above normal: 1.01, 1.22) but not center type or Bismuth class. CONCLUSIONS: Metallic stent performance was superior to plastic for hilar tumor palliation with respect to short-term outcomes, independent of disease severity, Bismuth class, or drainage quality.

Interventional endoscopy, neoadjuvant therapy and the gastroenterologist.

With current treatment, survival of greater than 1 year should be anticipated for many patients with pancreatic cancer. Cure rates (5-year survival) of greater than 10% have been achieved even for unresectable disease. Obstructive jaundice is managed successfully with endoscopic placement of a plastic stent early in the evaluation of a patient with suspected regional pancreatic cancer, and a metal wall stent is reserved for patients with known 1997 AJCC stage IVB carcinoma or nonoperative patients. Relief of biliary obstruction allows improvement in liver function and more time to evaluate tumor stage accurately to determine initial treatment (see Fig. 1). A cost-effective algorithm to determine accurate stage and treatment can start with the size of the mass on initial imaging studies. EUS-guided FNA represents a significant improvement over CT scan-guided FNA to make a tissue diagnosis. Small pancreatic masses that would be resected regardless of whether an FNA is positive or negative require only an EUS evaluation to establish an early resectable stage. Tumors reliably staged as unresectable by nonoperative imaging methods including EUS are treated with chemotherapy with or without concurrent radiotherapy because median survival of these patients is 2 years in some series. Tumors can be resected after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. For chronic pain or gastric outlet obstruction not responding or treatable by chemoradiotherapy, endoscopically guided celiac plexus nerve block and stenting improve the quality of life for patients with pancreatic cancer. A team approach is required to achieve the objectives of improved quality of life, prolonged survival, and possible cure for pancreatic cancer. The optimal combination and sequencing of staging methods, including EUS, specialized CT scan, MR imaging, intraoperative findings, and pathologic evaluations, would improve selection of patients for potential curative resection. Interpretations of disease stage based on each of these methods may overlap but are not identical and are operator dependent. Rather than reliance on any single standard, clinical judgment and communication among the team are paramount to providing optimal care for patients with a pancreatic neoplasm.