Amitabh Chak1, Bronia M Alashkar2, Gerard A Isenberg1, Apoorva K Chandar1, Katarina B Greer1, Ashley Hepner3, Richard D Pulice2, Srikrishna Vemana2, Yngve Falck-Ytter1, Ashley L Faulx1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Digestive Health Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Department of Gastroenterology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. 2. Department of Gastroenterology, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Digestive Health Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: EGD screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) is costly, with insufficient evidence to support its effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To compare acceptance and tolerability of 2 novel, office-based, endoscopic screening techniques done on nonsedated patients. DESIGN: Randomized block study design with allocation concealment. SETTING:Outpatient clinic setting at a Veterans Affairs medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 184 veterans with or without GERD symptoms. INTERVENTIONS:Transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) or esophageal capsule esophagoscopy (ECE). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Acceptance and tolerability of TNE and ECE and effectiveness of BE screening. RESULTS:Esophageal screening was accepted by 184 of 1210 (15.2%) veterans. The majority were men (96%) and African American (58%), with a mean (± standard deviation) age of 58.9 (± 8.1) years. Five TNE participants (5%) and 2 ECE participants (2%) refused the assigned procedure after randomization (P = .25). Eleven patients (12.6%) randomized to TNE crossed the minimal clinically important threshold for overall procedure tolerability, as opposed to no patients randomized to ECE (P = .001). Effectiveness of BE screening was not significantly different in both procedures (TNE vs ECE = 3.2% vs 5.4%; P = .47). Overall, BE was present in 8 of 75 white participants (10.6%) and in 0 of 107 African American participants (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: The general veteran population may not reflect the screening population for BE. CONCLUSION: Despite a small proportion of veterans expressing interest in esophageal screening, both TNE and ECE were feasible in the outpatient clinic setting and were accepted by >95% of participants who did express an interest. Screening was effective only in white participants. Moderate differences in tolerability between TNE and ECE notwithstanding, cost considerations along with availability of equipment and trained personnel should guide the modality to be used for BE screening.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: EGD screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) is costly, with insufficient evidence to support its effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To compare acceptance and tolerability of 2 novel, office-based, endoscopic screening techniques done on nonsedated patients. DESIGN: Randomized block study design with allocation concealment. SETTING:Outpatient clinic setting at a Veterans Affairs medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 184 veterans with or without GERD symptoms. INTERVENTIONS: Transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) or esophageal capsule esophagoscopy (ECE). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Acceptance and tolerability of TNE and ECE and effectiveness of BE screening. RESULTS: Esophageal screening was accepted by 184 of 1210 (15.2%) veterans. The majority were men (96%) and African American (58%), with a mean (± standard deviation) age of 58.9 (± 8.1) years. Five TNEparticipants (5%) and 2 ECEparticipants (2%) refused the assigned procedure after randomization (P = .25). Eleven patients (12.6%) randomized to TNE crossed the minimal clinically important threshold for overall procedure tolerability, as opposed to no patients randomized to ECE (P = .001). Effectiveness of BE screening was not significantly different in both procedures (TNE vs ECE = 3.2% vs 5.4%; P = .47). Overall, BE was present in 8 of 75 white participants (10.6%) and in 0 of 107 African American participants (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: The general veteran population may not reflect the screening population for BE. CONCLUSION: Despite a small proportion of veterans expressing interest in esophageal screening, both TNE and ECE were feasible in the outpatient clinic setting and were accepted by >95% of participants who did express an interest. Screening was effective only in white participants. Moderate differences in tolerability between TNE and ECE notwithstanding, cost considerations along with availability of equipment and trained personnel should guide the modality to be used for BE screening.
Authors: Blair A Jobe; John G Hunter; Eugene Y Chang; Charles Y Kim; Glenn M Eisen; Jedediah D Robinson; Brian S Diggs; Robert W O'Rourke; Anne E Rader; Paul Schipper; David A Sauer; Jeffrey H Peters; David A Lieberman; Cynthia D Morris Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Rami Eliakim; Virender K Sharma; Kamel Yassin; Samuel N Adler; Harold Jacob; David R Cave; Ritu Sachdev; Roger D Mitty; Dirk Hartmann; Dieter Schilling; Jurgen F Riemann; Simon Bar-Meir; Eytan Bardan; Brian Fennerty; Glenn Eisen; Douglas Faigel; Blair S Lewis; David E Fleischer Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Prateek Sharma; John Dent; David Armstrong; Jacques J G H M Bergman; Liebwin Gossner; Yoshio Hoshihara; Janusz A Jankowski; Ola Junghard; Lars Lundell; Guido N J Tytgat; Michael Vieth Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-08-16 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Douglas A Corley; Theodore R Levin; Laurel A Habel; Noel S Weiss; Patricia A Buffler Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Caroline H T Hall; Nathalie Nguyen; Glenn T Furuta; Jeremy Prager; Emily Deboer; Robin Deterding; Calies Menard-Katcher; Kelley E Capocelli; Robert E Kramer; Joel A Friedlander Journal: J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 2.839
Authors: Joel A Friedlander; Emily M DeBoer; Jason S Soden; Glenn T Furuta; Calies D Menard-Katcher; Dan Atkins; David M Fleischer; Robert E Kramer; Robin R Deterding; Kelley E Capocelli; Jeremy D Prager Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-07-02 Impact factor: 9.427