Clinical and histologic determinants of mortality for patients with Barrett's esophagus-related T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Superficial (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) commonly is treated by endoscopic resection, yet little is known about factors that predict outcomes of this approach. We assessed clinical and histologic variables associated with the overall survival times of patients with T1 EAC who received therapy. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis, we collected data from patients who underwent endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for T1 EAC (194 patients with T1a and 75 patients with T1b) at the Mayo Clinic, from 1995 through 2011. EMR specimens were reviewed systematically for depth of invasion, presence of lymphovascular invasion, grade of differentiation, and status of resection margins. Kaplan-Meier curves and proportional hazards regression models were used in statistical analyses. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were similar between patients with T1a and T1b EAC. Overall survival at 5 years after EMR was 74.4% for patients with T1a (95% confidence interval [CI], 67.6%-81.8%) and 53.2% for patients with T1b EAC (95% CI, 40.3%-70.1%). Of surviving patients with T1a EAC, 94.1% remained free of cancer (95% CI, 89.8%-98.5%), and 94.7% of surviving patients with T1b EAC remained free of cancer (95% CI, 85.2%-100%). A multivariable model associated older age (per 10-year increment), evidence of lymphovascular invasion, and deep margin involvement with reduced overall survival in patients with T1 EAC. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic assessment of EMR specimens can help predict mortality and potentially guide treatment options for patients with T1 EAC.

A randomized comparative effectiveness trial of novel endoscopic techniques and approaches for Barrett's esophagus screening in the community.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare participation rates and clinical effectiveness of sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (sEGD) and unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) for esophageal assessment and Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening in a population-based cohort. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial in a community population. Subjects ≥50 years of age who previously completed validated gastrointestinal symptom questionnaires were randomized (stratified by age, sex, and reflux symptoms) to one of three screening techniques (either sEGD or uTNE in a mobile research van (muTNE) or uTNE in a hospital outpatient endoscopy suite (huTNE)) and invited to participate. RESULTS: Of the 459 subjects, 209 (46%) agreed to participate (muTNE n=76, huTNE n=72, and sEGD n=61). Participation rates were numerically higher in the unsedated arms of muTNE (47.5%) and huTNE (45.7%) compared with the sEGD arm (40.7%), but were not statistically different (P=0.27). Complete evaluation of the esophagus was similar using muTNE (99%), huTNE (96%), and sEGD (100%) techniques (P=0.08). Mean recovery times (min) were longer for sEGD (67.3) compared with muTNE (15.5) and huTNE (18.5) (P<0.001). Approximately 80% of uTNE subjects were willing to undergo the procedure again in future. Respectively, 29% and 7.8% of participating subjects had esophagitis and BE. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile van and clinic uTNE screening had comparable clinical effectiveness with similar participation rates and safety profile to sEGD. Evaluation time with uTNE was significantly shorter. Prevalence of BE and esophagitis in community subjects ≥50 years of age was substantial. Mobile and outpatient unsedated techniques may provide an effective alternative strategy to sEGD for esophageal assessment and BE screening.

The risk of endoscopic mucosal resection in the setting of clopidogrel use.

Objective. Guidelines on antiplatelet medication use during endoscopy are based on limited evidence. We investigate the risk of bleeding and ischemic events in patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of esophageal lesions in the setting of scheduled cessation and prompt resumption of clopidogrel. Design. Single centre retrospective review. Patients. Patients undergoing EMR of esophageal lesions. Interventions. Use of clopidogrel before EMR and resumption after EMR. Patients cease antiplatelets and anticoagulants 7 days before EMR and resume clopidogrel 2 days after EMR in average risk patients. Main Outcomes. Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and ischemic events (IE) within 30 days of EMR. Results. 798 patients underwent 1716 EMR. 776 EMR were performed on patients on at least 1 antiplatelet/anticoagulant (APAC). 17 EMR were performed following clopidogrel cessation. There were 14 GIB and 2 IE. GIB risk in the setting of recent clopidogrel alone (0%) was comparable to those not on APAC (1.1%) (P = 1.0). IE risk on clopidogrel (6.3%) was higher than those not on APAC (0.1%) (P = 0.03). Limitations. Retrospective study. Conclusions. Temporary cessation of clopidogrel before EMR and prompt resumption is not associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding but may be associated with increased ischemic events.

Screening for Barrett's esophagus: results from a population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and adenocarcinoma (EAC) is controversial, but interest remains in finding the optimal method. Attitudes on screening within the community are unknown. We aimed to assess these attitudes via a survey. STUDY: A mixed-mode survey was conducted in adults >50 years to assess awareness regarding BE, willingness to participate in screening, and preferences regarding method of screening. Methods evaluated were sedated endoscopy (sEGD), unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) and video capsule (VCE). RESULTS: A total of 136 from 413 (33%) adults responded [47% males, mean (SD) age 63 (10.2) years], and 26% of responders knew of BE at baseline. After reading the information on BE, 72% were interested in screening. A history of undergoing screening tests and GI symptoms were predictive of interest. Unsedated techniques were preferred by 64% (VCE: 56% and uTNE: 8%) versus sEGD (36%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of adults were willing to undergo screening for BE/EAC, with a preference for unsedated techniques.

Metabolic syndrome as a risk factor for Barrett esophagus: a population-based case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between Barrett esophagus (BE) and the metabolic syndrome in patients with and without reflux symptoms and to determine whether this association is reflux independent and metabolically driven. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Case patients with BE and controls were residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota (1999-2006). Two control groups (one with and one without symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux) were identified from a cohort of patients who had responded to a validated gastrointestinal symptom questionnaire. Cases and controls were individually matched by age, sex, and duration of follow-up. Controls did not have a known diagnosis of BE. The association of the metabolic syndrome and its individual components with BE was assessed using univariate and multivariate conditional logistic regression separately for each control group. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients were included (103 BE cases, 103 controls with reflux symptoms, and 103 controls without reflux symptoms). A total of 64% of cases, 47% of controls with reflux symptoms, and 50% of controls without reflux symptoms had the metabolic syndrome. The metabolic syndrome was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of BE relative to those with (odds ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.10-3.65; P=.02) and without (odds ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.03-3.60; P=.04) reflux symptoms. This association was independent of smoking, alcohol consumption, and body mass index and remained robust with sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: The metabolic syndrome is associated with BE independent of reflux symptoms, which may reflect a reflux-independent pathway of BE pathogenesis.

Distribution of body fat and its influence on esophageal inflammation and dysplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Increased waist circumference and visceral fat are associated with increased risk of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma. This association might be mediated by mechanical and endocrine mechanisms. We investigated the distribution of fat in subjects with BE and its association with esophageal inflammation and dysplasia. METHODS: We collected data from 50 BE cases and 50 controls (matched for age and sex, identified from a radiology trauma database) seen at the Mayo Clinic in 2009. Abdominal (subcutaneous and visceral) and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) fat area was measured using computed tomography with standard techniques. Esophageal inflammation (based on a histologic score) and dysplasia grade were assessed from esophageal biopsies of BE cases by a gastrointestinal pathologist. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess the association of body fat depot area with BE status, esophageal inflammation, and dysplasia. RESULTS: All BE subjects had controlled reflux symptoms without esophagitis, based on endoscopy. The GEJ fat area (odds ratio [OR], 6.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-27.7; P = .02), visceral fat area (OR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.0-22.8; P = .04), and abdominal circumference (OR, 9.1; 95% CI, 1.4-57.2; P = 0.02) were associated with BE, independent of body mass index (BMI). The subcutaneous fat area was not associated with BE. Visceral and GEJ fat were significantly greater in BE subjects with esophageal inflammation (compared with those without, P = .02) and high-grade dysplasia (compared with those without, P = .01), independent of BMI. CONCLUSIONS: GEJ and visceral fat are associated with BE, and with increased esophageal inflammation and high-grade dysplasia in BE subjects, independent of BMI. Visceral fat therefore might promote esophageal metaplasia and dysplasia.

Safety of prior endoscopic mucosal resection in patients receiving radiofrequency ablation of Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is safe and effective treatment for flat dysplasia associated with Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, there are limited data on the safety of RFA in patients who had prior endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), which might increase the risk of complications. We compared complications and histologic outcomes between patients who had EMR before RFA and those who received only RFA. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data collected from patients treated for BE, associated with dysplasia or intramucosal cancer, at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from 1998-2009. Patients were divided into groups that had RFA after EMR (group 1, n = 44) or only RFA (group 2, n = 46). We compared the incidence of complications (strictures, bleeding, and esophageal perforation) and histologic features (complete resolution of dysplasia and complete resolution of intestinal metaplasia [CR-IM]) between groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of stricture formation. RESULTS: Stricture rates were 14% in group 1 and 9% in group 2 (odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-9.74). The rates of CR-IM were 43% in group 1 and 74% in group 2 (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14-0.78). The rates of complete resolution of dysplasia were 76% in group 1 and 71% in group 2 (odds ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.39-4.17). The adjusted odds ratio for CR-IM in group 1 (adjusting for age, segment length, and grade of dysplasia) was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.15-1.66). CONCLUSIONS: Stricture rates among patients who receive only RFA are comparable to those of patients who had prior EMR. EMR appears safe to perform prior to RFA.

Population screening for barrett esophagus: a prospective randomized pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) and video capsule endoscopy (VCE) as alternatives to sedated endoscopy (sEGD) as screening tools for Barrett esophagus (BE) and to obtain preliminary estimates of participation rates for sEGD, uTNE, and VCE when used for community BE screening in a population cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From February 1, 2009, to May 31, 2010, patients from Olmsted County, Minnesota, who were older than 50 years and had no history of known BE were randomized (stratified by age, sex, reflux symptoms noted in a validated questionnaire) into 3 groups for esophageal evaluation with sEGD, uTNE, or VCE. Participation rates and safety profiles were estimated. RESULTS: We contacted 127 patients to recruit 20 for each procedure arm (60 total). The probability of participation was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26%-51%) for sEGD, 50% (95% CI, 35%-65%) for uTNE, and 59% (95% CI, 42%-74%) for VCE. Both uTNE and VCE were well tolerated without adverse effects. BE was identified in 3 patients and esophagitis in 8. CONCLUSION: Unsedated techniques may be acceptable, feasible, and safe alternatives to sEGD to screen for BE in the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00943280.

Epidemiology and natural history of intestinal metaplasia of the gastroesophageal junction and Barrett's esophagus: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Population-based data on the epidemiology and outcomes of subjects with intestinal metaplasia of the gastroesophageal junction (IMGEJ) and Barrett's esophagus (BE) are limited. The objectives of this study were to (i) estimate the incidence of IMGEJ and BE diagnosed from clinically indicated endoscopy in Olmsted County, MN, over three decades (1976-2006) and prevalence as of 1 January 2007, (ii) compare baseline characteristics of subjects with IMGEJ and BE, and (iii) study the natural history and survival of both cohorts. METHODS: This was a population-based cohort study. The study setting was Olmsted County, MN. Patients with BE (columnar segment >1 cm with intestinal metaplasia) and IMGEJ (intestinal metaplasia in biopsies from the gastroesophageal junction) from 1976 to 2006 in Olmsted County, MN, were identified using Rochester Epidemiology Project resources. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from medical records and pathology confirmed by gastrointestinal pathologists. The association of baseline characteristics with overall and progression-free survival was assessed using proportional hazards regression models. Outcome measures were baseline characteristics and overall survival of subjects with IMGEJ compared to those with BE. RESULTS: In all, 487 patients (401 with BE and 86 with IMGEJ) were identified and followed for a median interval of 7 (BE subjects) to 8 (IMGEJ subjects) years. Subjects with BE were older, heavier, reported reflux symptoms more often, and had higher prevalence of advanced neoplasia than those with IMGEJ. No patient with IMGEJ progressed to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in contrast to BE subjects who had a cumulative risk of progression of 7% at 10 years and increased risk of death from EAC (standardized mortality ratio 9.62). The overall survival of subjects with BE and IMGEJ did not differ from that expected in similar age- and sex-distributed white Minnesota populations. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with IMGEJ appear to have distinct clinical characteristics and substantially lower cancer progression risk compared to those with BE.

Depth of submucosal invasion does not predict lymph node metastasis and survival of patients with esophageal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is controversy over the outcomes of esophageal adenocarcinoma with superficial submucosal invasion. We evaluated the impact of depth of submucosal invasion on the presence of metastatic lymphadenopathy and survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Pathology reports of esophagectomy samples collected from 1997 to 2007 were reviewed. Specimens from patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma and submucosal invasion were reviewed and classified as superficial (upper 1 third, sm1) or deep (middle third, sm2 or deepest third, sm3) invasion. Outcomes studied were presence of metastatic lymphadenopathy and overall survival. Variables of interest were analyzed as factors that affect overall and cancer-free survival using Cox proportional hazards modeling. A multivariate model was constructed to establish independent associations with survival. RESULTS: The study included 80 patients; 31 (39%) had sm1 carcinoma, 23 (29%) had sm2 carcinoma, and 26 (33%) had sm3 carcinoma. Superficial and deep submucosal invasion were associated with substantial rates of metastatic lymphadenopathy (12.9% and 20.4%, respectively). The mean follow-up time was 40.5 +/- 4 months and the mean overall unadjusted survival time was 53.8 +/- 4.1 months. Factors significantly associated with reduced survival time included the presence of metastatic lymph nodes (hazard ratio [HR], 2.89; confidence interval [CI], 1.13-6.88) and esophageal cancer recurrence (HR 6.39, CI 2.40-16.14), but not depth of submucosal invasion. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sm1 esophageal carcinoma have substantial rates of metastatic lymphadenopathy. Endoscopic treatment of superficial submucosal adenocarcinoma is not advised for patients that are candidates for surgery.

Prevalence and predictors of recurrent neoplasia after ablation of Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and risk factors for recurrence of dysplasia after ablation of Barrett's esophagus (BE) have not been well defined. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate and predictors of dysplasia/neoplasia recurrence after photodynamic therapy (PDT) in BE. SETTING: Retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort of BE patients seen at a specialized BE unit. METHODS: Patients underwent a standard protocol assessment with esophagogastroduodenoscopy and 4-quadrant biopsies every centimeter at 3-month intervals after ablation. Recurrence was defined as the appearance of any grade of dysplasia or neoplasia after 2 consecutive endoscopies without dysplasia. Entry histology, demographics, length of BE, presence and length of diaphragmatic hernia, EMR, stricture formation, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, smoking, and the presence of nondysplastic BE or squamous epithelium were assessed for univariate associations. Time-to-recurrence analysis was done by using Cox proportional hazards regression. A multivariate model was constructed to establish independent associations with recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 363 patients underwent PDT with or without EMR. Of these, 261 patients were included in the final analysis (44 lost to follow-up, 46 had residual dysplasia, and 12 had no dysplasia at baseline). Indication for ablation was low-grade dysplasia (53 patients, 20%), high-grade dysplasia (152 patients, 58%), and intramucosal cancer (56 patients, 21%). Median follow-up was 36 months (interquartile range 18-79 months). Recurrence occurred in 45 patients. Median time to recurrence was 17 months (interquartile range 8-45 months). Significant predictors of recurrence on the multivariate model were older age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04, P=.029), presence of residual nondysplastic BE (HR 2.88, P=.012), and a history of smoking (HR 2.68, P=.048). LIMITATIONS: Possibility of missing prevalent dysplasia despite aggressive surveillance. CONCLUSION: Recurrence of dysplasia/neoplasia after PDT ablation is associated with advanced age, smoking, and residual BE.

Endoscopic and surgical treatment of mucosal (T1a) esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic therapy is emerging as an alternative to surgical therapy in patients with mucosal (T1a) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) given the low likelihood of lymph node metastases. Long-term outcomes of patients treated endoscopically and surgically for mucosal EAC are unknown. We compared long-term outcomes of patients with mucosal EAC treated endoscopically and surgically. METHODS: Patients treated for mucosal EAC between 1998 and 2007 were included. Patients were divided into an endoscopically treated group (ENDO group) and a surgically treated group (SURG group). Vital status information was queried using an institutionally approved internet research and location service. Statistical analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard ratios. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were included, of whom 132 (74%) were in the ENDO group and 46 (26%) were in the SURG group. The mean follow-up period was 64 months (standard error of the mean, 4.8 mo) in the SURG group and 43 months (standard error of the mean, 2.8 mo) in the ENDO group. Cumulative mortality in the ENDO group (17%) was comparable with the SURG group (20%) (P = .75). Overall survival also was comparable using the Kaplan-Meier method. Treatment modality was not a significant predictor of survival on multivariable analysis. Recurrent carcinoma was detected in 12% of patients in the ENDO group, all successfully re-treated without impact on overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival in patients with mucosal EAC when treated endoscopically appears to be comparable with that of patients treated surgically. Recurrent carcinoma occurs in a limited proportion of patients, but can be managed endoscopically.

Noninvasive treatment of uterine fibroids: early Mayo Clinic experience with magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound.

Uterine fibroids often cause symptoms of pelvic pain, pressure, and bleeding. Traditional therapies have included medical (eg, hormonal therapy) and surgical (eg, myomectomy, hysterectomy) options. Recently, uterine artery embolization was added to the treatment armamentarium. We describe an exciting new non-invasive treatment option using focused ultrasound with magnetic resonance imaging and summarize the early experience at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn, during the initial research studies of this new technology.