Defining "true acid reflux" after peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The symptoms of reflux in achalasia patients undergoing peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are believed to result from gastroesophageal reflux, and the current treatment primarily focuses on acid suppression. Nevertheless, other factors such as nonreflux acidification caused by fermentation or stasis might play a role. This study aimed to identify patients with "true acid reflux" who actually require acid suppression and fundoplication. METHODS: In this prospective large cohort study, the primary objective was to assess the incidence and risk factors for true acid reflux in achalasia patients undergoing POEM. Acid reflux with normal and delayed clearance defined true acid reflux, whereas other patterns were labeled as nonreflux acidification patterns on manual analysis of pH tracings. These findings were corroborated with a symptom questionnaire, esophagogastroscopy, esophageal manometry, and timed barium esophagogram at 3 months after the POEM procedure. RESULTS: Fifty-four achalasia patients aged 18 to 80 years (mean age, 41.1 ± 12.8 years; 59.3% men; 90.7% with type II achalasia) underwent POEM, which resulted in a significant mean Eckardt score improvement (6.7 to 1.6, P < .05). True acid reflux was noted in 29.6% of patients as compared with 64.8% on automated analysis. Acid fermentation was the predominant acidification pattern seen in 42.7% of patients. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, increasing age (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.27; P = .04) and preprocedural integrated relaxation pressure (IRP; odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.30; P = .02) were significantly associated with true acid reflux in patients after undergoing POEM. CONCLUSIONS: A manual review of pH tracings helps to identify true acid reflux in patients with achalasia after undergoing POEM. Preprocedural IRP can be a predictive factor in determining patients at risk for this outcome. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04951739.).

Comparison of Quality Measures for Detection of Neoplasia at Screening Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The proportion of colonoscopies with at least one adenoma (adenoma detection rate [ADR]) is inversely associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) risk and death. The aim of this study was to examine whether such associations exist for colonoscopy quality measures other than ADR. METHODS: We used data from the Polish Colorectal Cancer Screening Program collected in 2000-2011. For all endoscopists who performed ≥100 colonoscopies we calculated detection rates of adenomas (ADR), polyps (PDR), and advanced adenomas (≥10 mm/villous component/high-grade dysplasia [AADR]); and number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) and per colonoscopy with ≥1 adenoma (APPC). We followed patients until CRC diagnosed before recommended surveillance, death, or December 31, 2019. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Cox proportional-hazard models. We used Harrell's C statistic to compare the predictive power of the quality measures. RESULTS: Data on 173,287 patients (median age, 56 years; 37.8% male) and 262 endoscopists were used. During a median follow-up of 10 years and 1,490,683 person-years, we identified 395 CRCs. All quality measures were significantly associated with CRC risk and death. The relative reductions in CRC risk were as follows: for ADR ≥24.9% (reference <12.1%; HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.25-0.66), PDR ≥42.7% (reference <19.9%; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.51), AADR ≥9.1% (reference <4.1%; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96), APC ≥0.37 (reference <0.15; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.21-0.58), and APPC ≥1.54 (reference <1.19; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35-0.83). AADR was the only quality measure with significantly lower predictive power than ADR (Harrell's C, 59.7 vs 63.4; P = .001). Similar relative reductions were observed for CRC death. CONCLUSIONS: This large observational study confirmed the inverse association between ADR and CRC risk and death. The PDR and APC quality measures appear to be comparable with ADR.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing the Total Enteroscopy Rate and Diagnostic Efficacy of Novel Motorized Spiral Enteroscopy and Single-Balloon Enteroscopy in Patients With Small-Bowel Disorders: The Motor Trial (NCT 05548140).

INTRODUCTION: Device-assisted enteroscopy has revolutionized the management of small-bowel disorders (SBD). No study to date has compared both novel motorized spiral enteroscopy (NMSE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) as a randomized controlled trial. Hence, this study was planned to include patients having SBD with the primary aim to compare the total enteroscopy rate (TER). METHODS: This study was conducted at the Asian Institute of Gastroenterology (AIG Hospitals), Hyderabad, India, from September 20, 2022, to December 15, 2022. All consecutive patients, older than 18 years with suspected SBD, and planned for total enteroscopy were screened for inclusion. The primary outcome was to compare the TER, and secondary outcomes were to compare the technical success, time taken to reach the depth of maximal insertion, withdrawal time, total procedure time, diagnostic yield, therapeutic success, and adverse events (AE). RESULTS: Seventy-two patients of the 110 patients screened were randomized in either NMSE (n = 35) or SBE (n = 37) group. The most common indication for the procedures was obscure gastrointestinal bleed (48%), others being unexplained abdominal pain with indeterminate radiologic findings (32%) and chronic diarrhea (20%). In NMSE group, the TER was 71.4%, whereas in the SBE group, it was 10.8% ( P < 0.0001). The total procedure time (minutes) was much lesser with NMSE (58.17 ± 21.5 minutes) vs SBE (114.2 ± 33.5 minutes) ( P < 0.0001). The diagnostic yield of NMSE (80%) was comparatively higher than SBE (62.1%) ( P = 0.096). Minor AE (grade I) were observed in both the groups: NMSE 8.5% (3/35) and SBE 5.4% (2/37). DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial shows that with NMSE higher TER can be achieved in shorter duration with minimal AE, compared with SBE.

The effect of procedural time on dysplasia detection rate during endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with Seattle protocol biopsies is time-consuming and inadequately performed in routine practice. There is no recommended procedural time for BE surveillance. We investigated the duration of surveillance procedures with adequate tissue sampling and effect on dysplasia detection rate (DDR). METHODS : We performed post hoc analysis from the standard arm of a crossover randomized controlled trial recruiting patients with BE (≥C2 and/or ≥M3) and no clearly visible dysplastic lesions. After inspection with white-light imaging, targeted biopsies of subtle lesions and Seattle protocol biopsies were performed. Procedure duration and biopsy number were stratified by BE length. The effect of endoscopy-related variables on DDR was assessed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS : Of 142 patients recruited, 15 (10.6 %) had high grade dysplasia/intramucosal cancer and 15 (10.6 %) had low grade dysplasia. The median procedural time was 16.5 minutes (interquartile range 14.0-19.0). Endoscopy duration increased by 0.9 minutes for each additional 1 cm of BE length. Seattle protocol biopsies had higher sensitivity for dysplasia than targeted biopsies (86.7 % vs. 60.0 %; P = 0.045). Longer procedural time was associated with increased likelihood of dysplasia detection on quadrantic biopsies (odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95 %CI 1.00-1.20, P = 0.04), and for patients with BE > 6 cm also on targeted biopsies (OR 1.21, 95 %CI 1.04-1.40; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS : In BE patients with no clearly visible dysplastic lesions, longer procedural time was associated with increased likelihood of dysplasia detection. Adequate time slots are required to perform good-quality surveillance and maximize dysplasia detection.

Image-Enhanced Endoscopy and Molecular Biomarkers Vs Seattle Protocol to Diagnose Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus often is invisible on high-resolution white-light endoscopy (HRWLE). We compared the diagnostic accuracy for inconspicuous dysplasia of the combination of autofluorescence imaging (AFI)-guided probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) and molecular biomarkers vs HRWLE with Seattle protocol biopsies. METHODS: Barrett's esophagus patients with no dysplastic lesions were block-randomized to standard endoscopy (HRWLE with the Seattle protocol) or AFI-guided pCLE with targeted biopsies for molecular biomarkers (p53 and cyclin A by immunohistochemistry; aneuploidy by image cytometry), with crossover to the other arm after 6 to 12 weeks. The primary end point was the histologic diagnosis from all study biopsies (trial histology). A sensitivity analysis was performed for overall histology, which included diagnoses within 12 months from the first study endoscopy. Endoscopists were blinded to the referral endoscopy and histology results. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy for dysplasia by real-time pCLE vs HRWLE biopsies. RESULTS: Of 154 patients recruited, 134 completed both arms. In the primary outcome analysis (trial histology analysis), AFI-guided pCLE had similar sensitivity for dysplasia compared with standard endoscopy (74.3%; 95% CI, 56.7-87.5 vs 80.0%; 95% CI, 63.1-91.6; P = .48). Multivariate logistic regression showed pCLE optical dysplasia, aberrant p53, and aneuploidy had the strongest correlation with dysplasia (secondary outcome). This 3-biomarker panel had higher sensitivity for any grade of dysplasia than the Seattle protocol (81.5% vs 51.9%; P < .001) in the overall histology analysis, but not in the trial histology analysis (91.4% vs 80.0%; P = .16), with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.83. CONCLUSIONS: Seattle protocol biopsies miss dysplasia in approximately half of patients with inconspicuous neoplasia. AFI-guided pCLE has similar accuracy to the current gold standard. The addition of molecular biomarkers could improve diagnostic accuracy.

The utility of P53 immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus with indefinite for dysplasia.

AIMS: Barrett's oesophagus with indefinite for dysplasia (BE-IND) is a subjective diagnosis with a low interobserver agreement (IOA) among pathologists and uncertain clinical implications. This study aimed to assess the utility of p53 immunohistochemistry (p53-IHC) in assessing BE-IND specimens. METHODS AND RESULTS: Archive endoscopic biopsies with a BE-IND diagnosis from two academic centres were analysed. First, haematoxylin and eosin-stained slides (H&E) were reviewed by four expert gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists allocated into two groups (A and B). After a washout period of at least 8 weeks, H&E slides were reassessed side-to-side with p53-IHC available. We compared the rate of changed diagnosis and the IOA for all BE grades before and after p53-IHC. We included 216 BE-IND specimens from 185 patients, 44.0 and 32.9% of which were confirmed after H&E slide revision by groups A and B, respectively. More than half the cases were reclassified to a non-dysplastic BE (NDBE), while 5.6% of cases in group A and 7.4% in group B were reclassified to definite dysplasia. The IOA for NDBE, BE-IND, low-grade dysplasia (LGD) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/intramucosal cancer (IMC) was 0.31, 0.21, -0.03 and -0.02, respectively. Use of p53-IHC led to a >40% reduction in BE-IND diagnoses (P < 0.001) and increased IOA for all BE grades [κ = 0.46 (NDBE), 0.26 (BE-IND), 0.49 (LGD), 0.35 (HGD/IMC)]. An aberrant p53-IHC pattern significantly increased the likelihood of reclassifying BE-IND to definite dysplasia (odds ratio = 44.3, 95% confidence interval = 18.8-113.0). CONCLUSION: P53-IHC reduces the rate of BE-IND diagnoses and improves the IOA among pathologists when reporting BE with equivocal epithelial changes.

Prevalence and risk factors of upper gastrointestinal cancers missed during endoscopy: a nationwide registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of upper gastrointestinal cancers (UGICs) remain undetected during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). We investigated the characteristics and risk factors of UGICs missed during endoscopy. METHODS: In this nationwide registry-based study, we analyzed two large Polish datasets (National Health Fund and National Cancer Registry) to identify individuals who underwent EGD and were subsequently diagnosed with UGIC. Cancers diagnosed < 6 months after EGD were defined as "prevalent" and those within ≥ 6- < 36 months as "missed." We compared the characteristics of missed and prevalent cancers, and analyzed the risk factors for missed UGICs in a multivariable regression model. RESULTS: We included 4 105 399 patients (mean age 56.0 years [SD 17.4]; 57.5 % female) who underwent 5 877 674 EGDs in 2012-2018. Within this cohort, 33 241 UGICs were diagnosed, of which 1993 (6.0 %) were missed. Within esophageal neoplasms, adenocarcinomas were more frequently missed than squamous cell cancers (6.1 % vs. 4.2 %), with a relative risk of 1.4 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.8, P = 0.01). Most gastric cancers were adenocarcinomas, of which 5.7 % were classified as missed. Overall, a higher proportion of missed UGICs than prevalent cancers presented at an advanced stage (42.2 % vs. 36.2 %, P < 0.001). Risk factors for missed UGICs included initial EGD performed within primary (vs. secondary) care (odds ratio [OR] 1.3, 95 %CI 1.2-1.5), female sex (OR 1.3, 95 %CI 1.2-1.4), and higher comorbidity (Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 5 vs. 0; OR 6.0, 95 %CI 4.7-7.5). CONCLUSIONS: Among UGICs, esophageal adenocarcinomas were missed most frequently. Missed cancers occur more frequently within the primary care sector and are found more often in women and individuals with multiple comorbidities.

Complete polyp resection with cold snare versus hot snare polypectomy for polyps of 4-9 mm: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic screening with polypectomy reduces the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC). Incomplete polyp removal may attenuate the effect of screening. This randomized trial compared cold snare polypectomy (CSP) with hot snare polypectomy (HSP) in terms of complete polyp resection. METHODS: We included patients ≥ 40 years of age at eight hospitals in four countries who had at least one non-pedunculated polyp of 4-9 mm detected at colonoscopy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to CSP or HSP. Biopsies from the resection margins were obtained systematically after polypectomy in both groups. We hypothesized that CSP would be non-inferior to HSP, with a non-inferiority margin of 5 %. Logistic regression models were fitted to identify the factors explaining incomplete resection. RESULTS: 425 patients, with 601 polyps, randomized to either CSP or HSP were included in the analysis. Of 318 polyps removed by CSP and 283 polyps removed by HSP, 34 (10.7 %) and 21 (7.4 %) were incompletely resected, respectively, with an adjusted risk difference of 3.2 % (95 %CI -1.4 % to 7.8 %). There was no difference between the groups in terms of post-polypectomy bleeding, perforation, or abdominal pain. Independent risk factors for incomplete removal were serrated histology (odds ratio [OR] 3.96; 95 %CI 1.63 to 9.66) and hyperplastic histology (OR 2.52; 95 %CI 1.30 to 4.86) in adjusted analyses. CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial, non-inferiority for CSP could not be demonstrated. Polyps with serrated histology are more prone to incomplete resection compared with adenomas. CSP can be used safely for small polyps in routine colonoscopy practice.

The Colon Endoscopic Bubble Scale (CEBuS): a two-phase evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: To date, no scale has been validated to assess bubbles associated with bowel preparation. This study aimed to develop and assess the reliability of a novel scale - the Colon Endoscopic Bubble Scale (CEBuS). METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study with two online evaluation phases of 45 randomly distributed still colonoscopy images (15 per scale grade). Observers assessed images twice, 2 weeks apart, using CEBuS (CEBuS-0 - no or minimal bubbles, covering < 5 % of the surface; CEBuS-1 - bubbles covering 5 %-50 %; CEBuS-2 - bubbles covering > 50 %) and reporting the clinical action (do nothing; wash with water; wash with simethicone). RESULTS: CEBuS provided high levels of agreement both in evaluation Phase 1 (4 experts) and Phase 2 (6 experts and 13 non-experts), with almost perfect intraobserver reliability: kappa 0.82 (95 % confidence interval 0.75-0.88) and 0.86 (0.85-0.88); interobserver agreement - intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.83 (0.73-0.89) and 0.90 (0.86-0.94). Previous endoscopic experience had no influence on agreement among experts vs. non-experts: kappa 0.86 (0.80-0.91) vs. 0.87 (0.84-0.89) and ICC 0.91 (0.87-0.94) vs. 0.90 (0.86-0.94), respectively. Interobserver agreement on clinical action was ICC 0.63 (0.43-0.78) in Phase 1 and 0.77 (0.68-0.84) in Phase 2. Absolute agreement on clinical action per scale grade was 85 % (82-88) for CEBuS-0, 21 % (16-26) for CEBuS-1, and 74 % (70-78) for CEBuS-2. CONCLUSION: CEBuS proved to be a reliable instrument to standardize the evaluation of colonic bubbles during colonoscopy. Assessment in daily practice is warranted.

The risk of neoplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus indefinite for dysplasia: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current understanding of the risk of neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett's esophagus with indefinite dysplasia (BE-IND) stems from small retrospective and pathology registry studies. In this multicenter cohort study, we aimed to determine the incidence and prevalence of neoplasia in BE-IND. METHODS: Patients with confirmed BE-IND from 2 academic centers were included if they had no previous evidence of dysplasia and underwent endoscopic follow-up (FU) of ≥1 year. The rate of progression to neoplasia was calculated and categorized as prevalent (progression within 1 year of FU) and incident (progression after 1 year of FU). Multivariable regression adjusted for relevant clinical features was performed to identify risk factors for progression. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-five patients diagnosed with BE-IND were identified between 1997 and 2017, of which 223 (48.0%) were excluded. Of the remaining 242 patients, 184 (76.0%) had no evidence of dysplasia during FU. In 23 patients (9.5%), prevalent neoplasia occurred (20 low-grade dysplasia [LGD], 2 high-grade dysplasia [HGD], 1 intramucosal cancer [IMC]), whereas 35 patients (14.5%) developed incident neoplasia (27 LGD, 5 HGD, 3 IMC), after a median 1.5 years (interquartile range, 0.6-3.2 years). The incidence rates of any neoplasia and HGD/IMC were 3.2 and 0.6 cases/100 patient-years, respectively. BE length correlated with an increased risk of prevalent (odds ratio, 1.18 per 1 cm; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.38; P = .033) and incident neoplasia (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.03; P = .016). CONCLUSION: Patients with BE-IND should be closely monitored, because nearly a quarter harbor or will shortly develop dysplasia. BE length is a clinical predictor of neoplastic progression; however, more-accurate molecular biomarkers for risk stratification are warranted.

Single-bite versus double-bite technique for mapping biopsies during endoscopic surveillance for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer: a single-center, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic surveillance is recommended in patients with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) who refuse or want to delay surgery. Because early signet-ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) can be inconspicuous, the current surveillance endoscopy protocol entails 30 random biopsies, which are time-consuming. This study aimed to compare single-bite and double-bite techniques in HDGC surveillance. METHODS : Between October 2017 and December 2018, consecutive patients referred for HDGC surveillance were prospectively randomized to the single- or double-bite arm. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield for SRCC foci. Secondary outcomes were: procedural time for random biopsies; comfort score; biopsy size; and quality of specimens, the latter assessed by the presence of muscularis mucosa, crush artifact, and proportion usable for diagnostic assessment. RESULTS : 25 patients were randomized to the single-bite arm and 23 to the double-bite arm. SRCC foci were detected in three and four patients in the single- and double-bite arms, respectively (P = 0.70). The procedural time for the double-bite arm (12 minutes, interquartile range [IQR] 4) was significantly shorter than for the single-bite arm (15 minute, IQR 6; P = 0.01), but comfort scores were similar. The size of the biopsies in the double-bite arm was significantly smaller than in single-bite arm (2.5 mm vs. 3.0 mm; P < 0.001) but this did not affect the presence of muscularis mucosa (P = 0.73), artifact level (P = 0.11), and diagnostic utility (P = 0.051). CONCLUSION : For patients undergoing HDGC surveillance, the double-bite technique is significantly faster than the single-bite technique. The diagnostic yield for SRCC and the biopsy quality were similar across both groups.

Radiofrequency ablation for low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus: long-term outcome of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A prior randomized study (Surveillance versus Radiofrequency Ablation study [SURF study]) demonstrated that radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with confirmed low-grade dysplasia (LGD) significantly reduces the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Our aim was to report the long-term outcomes of this study. METHODS: The SURF study randomized BE patients with confirmed LGD to RFA or surveillance. For this retrospective cohort study, all endoscopic and histologic data acquired at the end of the SURF study in May 2013 until December 2017 were collected. The primary outcome was rate of progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/cancer. All 136 patients randomized to RFA (n = 68) or surveillance (n = 68) in the SURF study were included. After closure of the SURF study, 15 surveillance patients underwent RFA based on patient preference and study outcomes. RESULTS: With 40 additional months (interquartile range, 12-51), the total median follow-up from randomization to last endoscopy was 73 months (interquartile range, 46-85). HGD/cancer was diagnosed in 1 patient in the RFA group (1.5%) and in 23 in the surveillance group (33.8%) (P = .000), resulting in an absolute risk reduction of 32.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.4%-44.2%) with a number needed to treat of 3.1 (95% CI, 2.3-4.5). Seventy-five of 83 patients (90%; 95% CI, 82.1%-95.0%) treated with RFA for BE reached complete clearance of BE and dysplasia. BE recurred in 7 of 75 patients (9%; 95% CI, 4.6%-18.0%), mostly minute islands or tongues, and LGD in 3 of 75 (4%; 95% CI, 1.4%-11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: RFA of BE with confirmed LGD significantly reduces the risk of malignant progression, with sustained clearance of BE in 91% and LGD in 96% of patients, after a median follow-up of 73 months. (Clinical trial registration number: NTR1198.).

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.

Endoscopist biopsy rate as a quality indicator for outpatient gastroscopy: a multicenter cohort study with validation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnosis of gastric premalignant conditions (GPCs) relies on endoscopy with mucosal sampling. We hypothesized that the endoscopist biopsy rate (EBR) might constitute a quality indicator for EGD, and we have analyzed its association with GPC detection and the rate of missed gastric cancers (GCs). METHODS: We analyzed EGD databases from 2 high-volume outpatient units. EBR values, defined as the proportion of EGDs with ≥1 biopsy to all examinations were calculated for each endoscopist in Unit A (derivation cohort) and divided by the quartile values into 4 groups. Detection of GPC was calculated for each group and compared using multivariate clustered logistic regression models. Unit B database was used for validation. All patients were followed in the Cancer Registry for missed GCs diagnosed between 1 month and 3 years after EGDs with negative results. RESULTS: Sixteen endoscopists in Unit A performed 17,490 EGDs of which 15,340 (87.7%) were analyzed. EBR quartile values were 22.4% to 36.7% (low EBR), 36.8% to 43.7% (moderate), 43.8% to 51.6% (high), and 51.7% and 65.8% (very-high); median value 43.8%. The odds ratios for the moderate, high, and very-high EBR groups of detecting GPC were 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.9), 2.0 (95% CI, 1.7-2.4), and 2.5 (95% CI, 2.1-2.9), respectively, compared with the low EBR group (P < .001). This association was confirmed with the same thresholds in the validation cohort. Endoscopists with higher EBR (≥43.8%) had a lower risk of missed cancer compared with those in the lower EBR group (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The EBR parameter is highly variable among endoscopists and is associated with efficacy in GPC detection and the rate of missed GCs.

Adenocarcinoma risk in patients registered with Polish Barrett's Oesophagus Registry.

Barrett's Oesophagus (BO) is a complication of chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) and is a major risk factor for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Current guidelines are based on data showing a 0.5% annual malignancy progression rate. The Polish Barrett's Oesophagus Registry (POBOR) was established to characterize Polish patients with BO and estimate the risk of malignant progression. POBOR was established in 1999 after a dedicated training of endoscopists and histopathologists. Physicians registered patients using a dedicated registry form. After excluding patients known to have endoscopic treatment for BO, follow-up <1 year and adenocarcinoma found at index endoscopy we have linked patients personal identification numbers (PESEL) with the National Cancer Registry to identify those with a diagnosis of oesophageal or gastric cardia adenocarcinoma. In total, 843 patients were registered [609 men (72.2%), male to female ratio 2.6:1] with median age at diagnosis of 56 years (IQR:47-67). Long segment BE was found at index endoscopy in 294 patients (39.4%) whereas low grade dysplasia in 147 (17.4%). 112 patients (13.3%) fulfilled the exclusion criteria and the remaining 731 were followed for a median of 9.8 years (IQR: 9.3-10.0). After 6779 patient-years, 6 adenocarcinomas were diagnosed yielding an incidence rate of 0.89 per 1000 patients-years (95% confidence interval [CI 0.40-1.97]) which corresponds to annual malignancy progression rate of less than 0.1%. The malignancy rate in patients with low grade dysplasia was 3.70 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 1.39-9.85). In Polish BO patients the risk of malignant progression was lower than previously reported. It was notably higher in patients with low grade dysplasia than in those with no dysplasia at index endoscopy, which may warrant strict surveillance in these patients.

Migrated lumen-apposing stent trapped within a pancreatic fluid collection: Forward-view EUS for the rescue!

Video 1Migrated lumen-apposing stent trapped within a pancreatic fluid collection: forward-view EUS for the rescue!