| Literature DB >> 28593183 |
Fabio Terabe1, Susumu Aikou1, Junko Aida2, Nobutake Yamamichi3, Michio Kaminishi4, Kaiyo Takubo2, Yasuyuki Seto1, Sachiyo Nomura1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Esophageal adenocarcinoma develops in the setting of gastroesophageal reflux and columnar metaplasia in distal esophagus. Columnar metaplasia arising in gastroesophageal reflux models has developed in rat; however, gastroesophageal reflux models in mice have not been well-characterized.Entities:
Keywords: AB, alcian blue; Barrett’s Esophagus; EGJ, esophagogastrojejunostomy; EJ, esophagojejunostomy; Esophageal Adenocarcinoma; Esophageal Reflux; GERD; GERD, gastroesophageal reflux disease; PAS, periodic acid–Schiff; TG, gastrectomy
Year: 2017 PMID: 28593183 PMCID: PMC5453905 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2017.03.009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol ISSN: 2352-345X
Figure 1Types of operations. (A) EGJ. (B) Esophageal separation and EJ. (C) EJ/TG. EGJ has reflux of gastric content and intestinal content periodically. EJ has reflux of mixture of gastric content and intestinal content. EJ/TG has reflux of intestinal content without gastric acid. D, duodenum; E, esophagus; J, jejunum; S, stomach. Scale bar: 5 mm. Arrows, anastomosis.
Figure 2Weight gain curves grouped by the type of operation. There was no statistical difference between sham and EGJ (P > .05). However there were statistical differences between EGJ and EJ (P < .01), and between EJ and EJ/TG (P < .01).
Figure 3Macroscopic appearance of specimens. From EJ/TG operation (A and C) and EGJ operation (B and D). Arrow in C shows a nodular lesion and arrowhead in D shows an area of ulceration, surrounded by a thickened mucosa. Scale bars: 2 mm in (A, B); 0.5 mm in (C, D).
Figure 4Representative histologic findings. (A) Normal squamous epithelium. (B) Hyperplasic squamous epithelium. (C) Metaplastic epithelium. (D) Dysplastic epithelium. Scale bar: 100 μm.
Incidence of Histologic Findings According to the Types of Operation
| Hyperplasia | Metaplasia | Dysplasia | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EGJ | 28/33 (84.8) | 15/33 (45.5) | 7/33 (21.2) |
| EJ | 28/38 (73.7) | 0/38 (0) | 0/38 (0) |
| EJ/TG | 37/39 (94.9) | 6/39 (15.4) | 1/39 (2.6) |
| Sham | 0/9 (0) | 0/9 (0) | 0/9 (0) |
Number of specimens/total per group (%).
Figure 5Comparison of Ki-67 and CDX-2. Ki-67 (A–C) and CDX-2 (D–F) expression in normal intestine (A, D), metaplastic (B, E), and dysplastic (C, F) esophageal columnar epithelium. Scale bar: 100 μm. CDX-2 is positive in all the cells in metaplasia but partly absent in dysplastic cells. Ki-67 was more scattered into mucosal surface cells in dysplasia.
Figure 6PAS/AB staining in metaplasia and dysplasia. PAS/AB staining in metaplasia (A), and in dysplasia (B). All the goblet cells are positive for PAS/AB staining. PDX-1 expression in metaplasia (C) and dysplasia (D), and negative expression in jejunum adjacent to columnar metaplasia in an EGJ model (E). PDX-1-positive cell rates were rather decreased in dysplastic change. P53 nuclear positivity in metaplasia (F), and dysplasia (G). Scale bar: 100 μm.
Figure 7Induction of intestinal metaplasia in a segment of gastric forestomach squamous epithelium opposite to the anastomosis. (A) Macroscopic view, with arrow indicating the region of metaplasia. (B) PAS/AB staining in metaplasia. (C) CDX-2 immunofluorescence. Scale bars: 2 mm in A; 100 μm in B and C.