Adjunctive Use of Wide-Area Transepithelial Sampling-3D in Patients With Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Increases Detection of Barrett's Esophagus and Dysplasia

Overview

Journal Am J Gastroenterol

Specialty Gastroenterology

Date 2024 Apr 18

PMID 38635377

Authors

Nicholas J Shaheen

Robert D Odze

Mendel E Singer

William J Salyers

Sachin Srinivasan

Vivek Kaul

Arvind J Trindade

Amit Aravapalli

Robert D Herman

Michael S Smith

Matthew J McKinley

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Patients with gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) symptoms undergoing screening upper endoscopy for Barrett's esophagus (BE) frequently demonstrate columnar-lined epithelium, with forceps biopsies (FBs) failing to yield intestinal metaplasia (IM). Repeat endoscopy is then often necessary to confirm a BE diagnosis. The aim of this study was to assess the yield of IM leading to a diagnosis of BE by the addition of wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS-3D) to FB in the screening of patients with GERD.

Methods: We performed a prospective registry study of patients with GERD undergoing screening upper endoscopy. Patients had both WATS-3D and FB. Patients were classified by their Z line appearance: regular, irregular (<1 cm columnar-lined epithelium), possible short-segment BE (1 to <3 cm), and possible long-segment BE (≥3 cm). Demographics, IM yield, and dysplasia yield were calculated. Adjunctive yield was defined as cases identified by WATS-3D not detected by FB, divided by cases detected by FB. Clinicians were asked if WATS-3D results affected patient management.

Results: Of 23,933 patients, 6,829 (28.5%) met endoscopic criteria for BE. Of these, 2,878 (42.1%) had IM identified by either FB or WATS-3D. Among patients fulfilling endoscopic criteria for BE, the adjunctive yield of WATS-3D was 76.5% and absolute yield was 18.1%. One thousand three hundred seventeen patients (19.3%) who fulfilled endoscopic BE criteria had IM detected solely by WATS-3D. Of 240 patients with dysplasia, 107 (44.6%) were found solely by WATS-3D. Among patients with positive WATS-3D but negative FB, the care plan changed in 90.7%.

Discussion: The addition of WATS-3D to FB in patients with GERD being screened for BE resulted in confirmation of BE in an additional one-fifth of patients. Furthermore, dysplasia diagnoses approximately doubled.

References

Armstrong D, Bennett J, Blum A, Dent J, de Dombal F, Galmiche J . The endoscopic assessment of esophagitis: a progress report on observer agreement. Gastroenterology. 1996; 111(1):85-92. DOI: 10.1053/gast.1996.v111.pm8698230. View

Qumseya B, Bukannan A, Gendy S, Ahemd Y, Sultan S, Bain P . Systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence and risk factors for Barrett's esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019; 90(5):707-717.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.05.030. View

Jones T, Sharma P, Daaboul B, Cherian R, Mayo M, Topalovski M . Yield of intestinal metaplasia in patients with suspected short-segment Barrett's esophagus (SSBE) on repeat endoscopy. Dig Dis Sci. 2002; 47(9):2108-11. DOI: 10.1023/a:1019697501650. View

Shaheen N, Falk G, Iyer P, Souza R, Yadlapati R, Sauer B . Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022; 117(4):559-587. PMC: 10259184. DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001680. View

Crockett S, Lipkus I, Bright S, Sampliner R, Wang K, Boolchand V . Overutilization of endoscopic surveillance in nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus: a multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 75(1):23-31.e2. PMC: 3961007. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.08.042. View

Eusebi L, Telese A, Cirota G, Haidry R, Zagari R, Bazzoli F . Effect of gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms on the risk of Barrett's esophagus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 37(8):1507-1516. PMC: 9543729. DOI: 10.1111/jgh.15902. View

Rex D, Cummings O, Shaw M, Cumings M, Wong R, Vasudeva R . Screening for Barrett's esophagus in colonoscopy patients with and without heartburn. Gastroenterology. 2004; 125(6):1670-7. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2003.09.030. View

Codipilly D, Chandar A, Wang K, Katzka D, Goldblum J, Thota P . Wide-area transepithelial sampling for dysplasia detection in Barrett's esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021; 95(1):51-59.e7. PMC: 8671247. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.09.015. View

Bayerdorffer E, Bigard M, Weiss W, Mearin F, Rodrigo L, Dominguez Munoz J . Randomized, multicenter study: on-demand versus continuous maintenance treatment with esomeprazole in patients with non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease. BMC Gastroenterol. 2016; 16:48. PMC: 4831110. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-016-0448-x. View

10.

Khandwalla H, Graham D, Kramer J, Ramsey D, Duong N, Green L . Barrett's esophagus suspected at endoscopy but no specialized intestinal metaplasia on biopsy, what's next?. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013; 109(2):178-82. PMC: 4046947. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2013.408. View

11.

Levine D, Haggitt R, Blount P, Rabinovitch P, Rusch V, Reid B . An endoscopic biopsy protocol can differentiate high-grade dysplasia from early adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus. Gastroenterology. 1993; 105(1):40-50. DOI: 10.1016/0016-5085(93)90008-z. View

12.

Wani S, Williams J, Komanduri S, Muthusamy V, Shaheen N . Endoscopists systematically undersample patients with long-segment Barrett's esophagus: an analysis of biopsy sampling practices from a quality improvement registry. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019; 90(5):732-741.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.04.250. View

13.

Trindade A, Odze R, Smith M, Kaul V . Benefit of adjunctive wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis plus forceps biopsy based on Barrett's esophagus segment length. Gastrointest Endosc. 2023; 98(3):316-325. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2023.03.032. View

14.

Sharma P . Barrett Esophagus: A Review. JAMA. 2022; 328(7):663-671. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.13298. View

15.

Vahabzadeh B, Seetharam A, Cook M, Wani S, Rastogi A, Bansal A . Validation of the Prague C & M criteria for the endoscopic grading of Barrett's esophagus by gastroenterology trainees: a multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 75(2):236-41. PMC: 4547779. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.017. View

16.

van der Wel M, Coleman H, Bergman J, Jansen M, Meijer S . Histopathologist features predictive of diagnostic concordance at expert level among a large international sample of pathologists diagnosing Barrett's dysplasia using digital pathology. Gut. 2019; 69(5):811-822. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-318985. View

17.

Shaheen N, Smith M, Odze R . Progression of Barrett's esophagus, crypt dysplasia, and low-grade dysplasia diagnosed by wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis: a retrospective analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021; 95(3):410-418.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.09.014. View

18.

Tack J, Vladimirov B, Horny I, Chong C, Eisner J, Czerniak R . Randomized clinical trial: A double-blind, proof-of-concept, phase 2 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan 20 or 40 mg versus esomeprazole 40 mg in patients with symptomatic gastro-esophageal reflux disease and partial response to a.... Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2022; 35(1):e14468. DOI: 10.1111/nmo.14468. View

19.

Eloubeidi M, Provenzale D . Clinical and demographic predictors of Barrett's esophagus among patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease: a multivariable analysis in veterans. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001; 33(4):306-9. DOI: 10.1097/00004836-200110000-00010. View

20.

Smith M, Ikonomi E, Bhuta R, Iorio N, Kataria R, Kaul V . Wide-area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted 3-dimensional analysis (WATS) markedly improves detection of esophageal dysplasia and Barrett's esophagus: analysis from a prospective multicenter community-based study. Dis Esophagus. 2018; 32(3). PMC: 6403460. DOI: 10.1093/dote/doy099. View