Jorge D Machicado1, Samuel Han1, Rena H Yadlapati1, Violette C Simon1, Bashar J Qumseya2, Shahnaz Sultan3, Vladimir M Kushnir4, Sri Komanduri5, Amit Rastogi6, V Raman Muthusamy7, Rehan Haidry8, Krish Ragunath9, Rajvinder Singh10, Hazem T Hammad1, Nicholas J Shaheen11, Sachin Wani12. 1. University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. 2. Archbold Medical Center, Thomasville, GA, USA. 3. Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 4. Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA. 5. Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 6. University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, KS, USA. 7. University of California in Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 8. University College Hospital, London, UK. 9. University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 10. University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. 11. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 12. University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. sachinwani10@yahoo.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Published guidelines do not address what the minimum incremental diagnostic yield (IDY) for detection of dysplasia/cancer is required over the standard Seattle protocol for an advanced imaging modality (AIM) to be implemented in routine surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients. We aimed to report expert practice patterns and attitudes, specifically addressing the minimum IDY in the use of AIMs in BE surveillance. METHODS: An international group of BE experts completed an anonymous electronic survey of domains relevant to surveillance practice patterns and use of AIMs. The evaluated AIMs were conventional chromoendoscopy (CC), virtual chromoendoscopy (VC), volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE), confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), and wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS3D). Responses were recorded using five-point balanced Likert items and analyzed as continuous variables. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 84% (61/73)-41 US and 20 non-US. Experts were most comfortable with and routinely use VC and CC, and least comfortable with and rarely use VLE, CLE, and WATS3D. Experts rated data from randomized controlled trials (1.4 ± 0.9) and guidelines (2.6 ± 1.2) as the two most influential factors for implementing AIMs in clinical practice. The minimum IDY of AIMs over standard biopsies to be considered of clinical benefit was lowest for VC (15%, IQR 10-29%) and highest for VLE (30%, IQR 20-50%). Compared to US experts, non-US experts reported higher use of CC for BE surveillance (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These results should inform benchmarks that need to be met for guidelines to recommend the routine use of AIMs in the surveillance of BE patients.
BACKGROUND: Published guidelines do not address what the minimum incremental diagnostic yield (IDY) for detection of dysplasia/cancer is required over the standard Seattle protocol for an advanced imaging modality (AIM) to be implemented in routine surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients. We aimed to report expert practice patterns and attitudes, specifically addressing the minimum IDY in the use of AIMs in BE surveillance. METHODS: An international group of BE experts completed an anonymous electronic survey of domains relevant to surveillance practice patterns and use of AIMs. The evaluated AIMs were conventional chromoendoscopy (CC), virtual chromoendoscopy (VC), volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE), confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), and wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS3D). Responses were recorded using five-point balanced Likert items and analyzed as continuous variables. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 84% (61/73)-41 US and 20 non-US. Experts were most comfortable with and routinely use VC and CC, and least comfortable with and rarely use VLE, CLE, and WATS3D. Experts rated data from randomized controlled trials (1.4 ± 0.9) and guidelines (2.6 ± 1.2) as the two most influential factors for implementing AIMs in clinical practice. The minimum IDY of AIMs over standard biopsies to be considered of clinical benefit was lowest for VC (15%, IQR 10-29%) and highest for VLE (30%, IQR 20-50%). Compared to US experts, non-US experts reported higher use of CC for BE surveillance (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These results should inform benchmarks that need to be met for guidelines to recommend the routine use of AIMs in the surveillance of BEpatients.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advanced imaging modalities; Barrett’s esophagus; Practice patterns; Surveillance
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Prateek Sharma; Thomas J Savides; Marcia I Canto; Douglas A Corley; Gary W Falk; John R Goldblum; Kenneth K Wang; Michael B Wallace; Herbert C Wolfsen Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Romy E Verbeek; Max Leenders; Fiebo J W Ten Kate; Richard van Hillegersberg; Frank P Vleggaar; Jantine W P M van Baal; Martijn G H van Oijen; Peter D Siersema Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Marcia Irene Canto; Sharmila Anandasabapathy; William Brugge; Gary W Falk; Kerry B Dunbar; Zhe Zhang; Kevin Woods; Jose Antonio Almario; Ursula Schell; John Goldblum; Anirban Maitra; Elizabeth Montgomery; Ralf Kiesslich Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2013-11-09 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Jo-Etienne Abela; James J Going; John F Mackenzie; Margaret McKernan; Sylvia O'Mahoney; Robert C Stuart Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2008-03-26 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Rebecca C Fitzgerald; Massimiliano di Pietro; Krish Ragunath; Yeng Ang; Jin-Yong Kang; Peter Watson; Nigel Trudgill; Praful Patel; Philip V Kaye; Scott Sanders; Maria O'Donovan; Elizabeth Bird-Lieberman; Pradeep Bhandari; Janusz A Jankowski; Stephen Attwood; Simon L Parsons; Duncan Loft; Jesper Lagergren; Paul Moayyedi; Georgios Lyratzopoulos; John de Caestecker Journal: Gut Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Andreas V Hadjinicolaou; Sanne N van Munster; Achilleas Achilleos; Jose Santiago Garcia; Sarah Killcoyne; Krish Ragunath; Jacques J G H M Bergman; Rebecca C Fitzgerald; Massimiliano di Pietro Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2020-05-24 Impact factor: 8.143