Literature DB >> 11677477

Accuracy in the diagnosis of short-segment Barrett's esophagus: the role of endoscopic experience.

S Padda1, F C Ramirez.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus is based on histologic demonstration of specialized intestinal metaplasia. Experience may be important in the endoscopic recognition of Barrett's esophagus, including in regard to appropriate procurement of biopsy specimens. The aim of this study was to assess factors that may influence accuracy in the diagnosis of short-segment Barrett's esophagus (SSB).
METHODS: Endoscopy reports pertaining to procedures performed over a 1-year period that included esophageal biopsies because of suspected intestinal metaplasia were reviewed. Barrett's epithelium involving less than 2 cm of the distal esophagus was considered SSB; greater than 2 cm was considered long-segment (LSB). Endoscopists were regarded as "more experienced" if they had completed training more than 5 years earlier and "less experienced" if the time elapsed since the completion of training was less than 5 years.
RESULTS: More and less experienced endoscopists both obtained esophageal biopsy specimens because of suspected Barrett's esophagus at the same rate (14%). Length of suspected Barrett's epithelium was not predicted by symptoms or demographic data. Endoscopically, patients with SSB had significantly fewer (64.2% vs. 90.8%) and smaller (2.9 +/- 0.1 vs. 3.5 +/- 0.2 cm) hiatal hernias compared with those with LSB (p < 0.05). Suspected SSB was histologically confirmed in 38.4% (True SSB), whereas LSB was confirmed in 75% (True SSB) (p < 0.05). More experienced endoscopists were significantly more likely to obtain histologic confirmation of SSB than less experienced endoscopists (48.6% vs. 29.5%; p = 0.02, nominal significance from univariate hypothesis testing; correction for multiple testing of data removed significance at the p < 0.05 level; OR = 2.26).
CONCLUSION: With greater experience, an endoscopist is more likely to diagnose SSB. This may be due to more accurate procurement of adequate tissue samples, which thereby results in a greater yield of histopathologic diagnoses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11677477     DOI: 10.1067/mge.2001.118714

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  7 in total

1.  Quantitative evaluation of in vivo vital-dye fluorescence endoscopic imaging for the detection of Barrett's-associated neoplasia.

Authors:  Nadhi Thekkek; Michelle H Lee; Alexandros D Polydorides; Daniel G Rosen; Sharmila Anandasabapathy; Rebecca Richards-Kortum
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 3.170

Review 2.  The interplay between Helicobacter pylori, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and intestinal metaplasia.

Authors:  P Malfertheiner; U Peitz
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  Celiac disease and intestinal metaplasia of the esophagus (Barrett's esophagus).

Authors:  Roberto Maieron; Luca Elli; Marco Marino; Irene Floriani; Francesco Minerva; Claudio Avellini; Giovanni Falconieri; Stefano Pizzolitto; Maurizio Zilli
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Utility of endoscopy for diagnosis of barrett in a non-Western society: endoscopic and histopathologic correlation.

Authors:  Bahadır Ege; Tolga Dinç; Baris D Yildiz; Zeynep Balci; Hakan Bozkaya
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2015-01-14

5.  Inter-endoscopist agreement in diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus.

Authors:  Glen A Doherty; Danny G Cheriyan; Jan E Leyden; John F O'Dowd; Frank E Murray; Stephen E Patchett
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-03-20

6.  The value of traditional upper endoscopy as a diagnostic test for Barrett's esophagus.

Authors:  Amy Wang; Nora C Mattek; Christopher L Corless; David A Lieberman; Glenn M Eisen
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2008-06-02       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  The Munich Barrett follow up study: suspicion of Barrett's oesophagus based on either endoscopy or histology only--what is the clinical significance?

Authors:  A Meining; R Ott; I Becker; S Hahn; J Mühlen; M Werner; H Höfler; M Classen; W Heldwein; T Rösch
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 23.059

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.