BACKGROUND:Endoscopic trimodal imaging (ETMI) may improve detection of early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE). Studies with ETMI so far have been performed in tertiary referral settings only. OBJECTIVE: To compare ETMI with standard video endoscopy (SVE) for the detection of neoplasia in BE patients with an intermediate-risk profile. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, crossover study. SETTING: Community practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BE patients with confirmed low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN) underwent both ETMI and SVE in random order (interval 6-16 weeks). During ETMI, BE was inspected with high-resolution endoscopy followed by autofluorescence imaging (AFI). All visible lesions were then inspected with narrow-band imaging. During ETMI and SVE, visible lesions were sampled followed by 4-quadrant random biopsies every 2 cm. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Overall histological yield of ETMI and SVE and targeted histological yield of ETMI and SVE. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients (79 men, 63±10 years) underwent both procedures. ETMI had a significantly higher targeted histological yield because of additional detection of 22 lesions with LGIN/high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN)/carcinoma (Ca) by AFI. There was no significant difference in the overall histological yield (targeted+random) between ETMI and SVE. HGIN/Ca was diagnosed only by random biopsies in 6 of 24 patients and 7 of 24 patients, with ETMI and SVE, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Inspection, with high-resolution endoscopy and AFI, was performed sequentially. CONCLUSION: ETMI performed in a community-based setting did not improve the overall detection of dysplasia compared with SVE. The diagnosis of dysplasia is still being made in a significant number of patients by random biopsies. Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of LGIN have a significant risk of HGIN/Ca. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN91816824; NTR867.).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic trimodal imaging (ETMI) may improve detection of early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE). Studies with ETMI so far have been performed in tertiary referral settings only. OBJECTIVE: To compare ETMI with standard video endoscopy (SVE) for the detection of neoplasia in BE patients with an intermediate-risk profile. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, crossover study. SETTING: Community practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BE patients with confirmed low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN) underwent both ETMI and SVE in random order (interval 6-16 weeks). During ETMI, BE was inspected with high-resolution endoscopy followed by autofluorescence imaging (AFI). All visible lesions were then inspected with narrow-band imaging. During ETMI and SVE, visible lesions were sampled followed by 4-quadrant random biopsies every 2 cm. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Overall histological yield of ETMI and SVE and targeted histological yield of ETMI and SVE. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients (79 men, 63±10 years) underwent both procedures. ETMI had a significantly higher targeted histological yield because of additional detection of 22 lesions with LGIN/high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN)/carcinoma (Ca) by AFI. There was no significant difference in the overall histological yield (targeted+random) between ETMI and SVE. HGIN/Ca was diagnosed only by random biopsies in 6 of 24 patients and 7 of 24 patients, with ETMI and SVE, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Inspection, with high-resolution endoscopy and AFI, was performed sequentially. CONCLUSION:ETMI performed in a community-based setting did not improve the overall detection of dysplasia compared with SVE. The diagnosis of dysplasia is still being made in a significant number of patients by random biopsies. Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of LGIN have a significant risk of HGIN/Ca. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN91816824; NTR867.).
Authors: Elizabeth L Bird-Lieberman; André A Neves; Pierre Lao-Sirieix; Maria O'Donovan; Marco Novelli; Laurence B Lovat; William S Eng; Lara K Mahal; Kevin M Brindle; Rebecca C Fitzgerald Journal: Nat Med Date: 2012-01-15 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: J Mannath; V Subramanian; E Telakis; K Lau; V Ramappa; M Wireko; P V Kaye; K Ragunath Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2012-09-09 Impact factor: 3.199