Literature DB >> 29934224

Simplified versus standard regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation of dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Roos E Pouw1, Hannah T Künzli2, Raf Bisschops3, Carine M Sondermeijer1, Arjun D Koch4, Paul Didden4, Anniek W Gotink4, Erik J Schoon5, Wouter L Curvers5, Jacques J G H M Bergman1, Bas L A M Weusten6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For focal radiofrequency ablation of Barrett's oesophagus, a simplified regimen (3 × 15 J/cm2, without cleaning) has proven to be as effective as the standard regimen (2 × 15 J/cm2, followed by cleaning, followed by 2 × 15 J/cm2). However, this simplified regimen seemed to be associated with a higher stenosis rate. Therefore, we lowered the radiofrequency energy and hypothesised that this new simplified regimen would be as effective and safe as the standard regimen.
METHODS: This randomised non-inferiority trial included patients with dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus or residual Barrett's oesophagus after endoscopic resection or circumferential radiofrequency ablation, in five European tertiary referral centres. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the new simplified regimen (3 × 12 J/cm2, without cleaning) or the standard regimen, with variable block sizes of four, six, and eight patients, stratified by participating hospital. Focal radiofrequency ablation was done every 3 months, up to a maximum of three treatments, until all Barrett's oesophagus was eradicated. The primary outcome was complete endoscopic and histological regression of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia after two focal radiofrequency ablation treatments, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Non-inferiority was assessed on the basis of the difference between groups in the median percentage of Barrett's oesophagus surface regression, with a non-inferiority margin of -15%. This study is registered with www.trialregister.nl, number NTR4994, and is completed.
FINDINGS: Between March 25, 2015, and July 25, 2016, 84 patients were randomly assigned to treatment: 44 to receive the simplified regimen and 40 to receive the standard regimen. One patient assigned to the simplified regimen and four assigned to the standard regimen were excluded because they weree found not to be eligible; therefore the final intention-to-treat population consisted of 43 patients in the simplified ablation group and 36 in the standard ablation group. Complete endoscopic and histological regression of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia after two focal radiofrequency ablation treatments was achieved in 32 (74%, 95% CI 59-87) patients treated with the simplified protocol, versus 30 (83%, 95% CI 67-94) patients treated with the standard protocol (p=0·34). Median Barrett's oesophagus surface regression after two focal radiofrequency ablation sessions was 98% (IQR 95-100) in the simplified regimen group and 100% (97-100) in the standard regimen group. The difference between medians was 2% (95% CI -0·562 to 3·162); thus the simplified regimen was deemed non-inferior to the standard regimen. Stenoses requiring dilatation were observed in four (9%) of 43 patients in the simplified regimen group and four (11%) of 36 in the standard regimen group. Post-procedural bleeding requiring repeat endoscopy occurred in one (2%) patient in the simplified ablation group and three (8%) patients in the standard ablation group. One patient (2%) in the simplified treatment group died 36 days after the second radiofrequency ablation procedure, due to an unknown cause.
INTERPRETATION: Based on the results of this study, we conclude that the simplified regimen is the preferred regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation of Barrett's oesophagus. FUNDING: None.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29934224     DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30157-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol


  4 in total

1.  Quality indicators for Barrett's endotherapy (QBET): UK consensus statements for patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for Barrett's neoplasia.

Authors:  Durayd Alzoubaidi; Krish Ragunath; Sachin Wani; Ian D Penman; Nigel John Trudgill; Marnix Jansen; Matthew Banks; Pradeep Bhandari; Allan John Morris; Robert Willert; Phil Boger; Howard L Smart; Narayanasamy Ravi; Jason Dunn; Charles Gordon; Jayan Mannath; Inder Mainie; Massi di Pietro; Andrew M Veitch; Sally Thorpe; Cormac Magee; Martin Everson; Sarmed Sami; Paul Bassett; David Graham; Stephen Attwood; Oliver Pech; Prateek Sharma; Laurence B Lovat; Rehan Haidry
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-08-14

2.  Standard versus simplified radiofrequency ablation protocol for Barrett's esophagus: comparative analysis of the whole treatment pathway.

Authors:  Wei Keith Tan; Krish Ragunath; Jonathan R White; Jose Santiago; Jacobo Ortiz Fernandez-Sordo; Mirela Pana; Bincy Alias; Andreas V Hadjinicolaou; Vijay Sujendran; Massimiliano di Pietro
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2020-01-22

3.  Endoscopic Resection Without Subsequent Ablation Therapy for Early Barrett's Neoplasia: Endoscopic Findings and Long-Term Mortality.

Authors:  S N van Munster; E A Nieuwenhuis; B L A M Weusten; L Alvarez Herrero; A Bogte; A Alkhalaf; B E Schenk; E J Schoon; W Curvers; A D Koch; S E M van de Ven; P J F de Jonge; T Tang; W B Nagengast; F T M Peters; J Westerhof; M H M G Houben; Jacques J G H M Bergman; R E Pouw
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Long-term outcomes after endoscopic treatment for Barrett's neoplasia with radiofrequency ablation ± endoscopic resection: results from the national Dutch database in a 10-year period.

Authors:  Sanne van Munster; Esther Nieuwenhuis; Bas L A M Weusten; Lorenza Alvarez Herrero; Auke Bogte; Alaa Alkhalaf; B E Schenk; Erik J Schoon; Wouter Curvers; Arjun D Koch; Steffi Elisabeth Maria van de Ven; Pieter Jan Floris de Jonge; Tjon J Tang; Wouter B Nagengast; Frans T M Peters; Jessie Westerhof; Martin H M G Houben; Jacques Jghm Bergman; Roos E Pouw
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 23.059

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.