ArticleClinical and experimental gastroenterology2009
Accuracy of identification of tissue types in endoscopic esophageal mucosal biopsies used for molecular biology studies.
Article in Clinical and experimental gastroenterology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- MicroRNA profile in neosquamous esophageal mucosa following ablation of Barrett's esophagus.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
- MicroRNA-196a & microRNA-101 expression in Barrett's oesophagus in patients with medically and surgically treated gastro-oesophageal reflux.BMC research notes · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine if histopathologic assessment of esophageal biopsies harvested for research study is justified due to the heterogeneity of tissues in the esophagus, and the consequent histopathologic mis-matches with the clinical histopathology of biopsies taken at the same level.
methodsSince 2004, patients undergoing upper endoscopy for a variety of clinical conditions were invited to provide additional esophageal biopsies; those were collected for research purpose at the same level as biopsies collected for clinical histopathology. Research biopsies were cut in two parts: one part was submitted to research histopathology and the other stored for molecular analysis. Results of clinical histopathology for each patient were summarized per biopsy level and compared to results obtained from research biopsies at the corresponding level.
resultsA total of 377 level summaries were obtained from 137 patients. Clinical histopathology summaries classified 123 levels (32.6%) as squamous epithelium, 84 levels (22.3%) as metaplastic columnar-lined epithelium, 135 levels (35.8%) as columnar-lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia, 30 levels (8%) as dysplasia, and 5 levels (1.3%) as adenocarcinoma. Research histopathology matched to clinical summaries on 120 of 123 (97.5%) levels for squamous epithelium, 52 of 84 (61.9%) for metaplastic columnar-lined epithelium, and 94 of 135 (69.5%) for columnar-lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia. There were no matches for dysplasia between the groups; however, they agreed on all five cases of AC. On 59 (70.2%) metaplastic columnar-lined epithelium levels and on 62 (46%) columnar-lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia levels, tissue heterogeneity was observed in clinical histopathology, with portions of squamous epithelium within the samples. Matches with pure tissue samples in both clinical and research histopathology levels were observed on 22 (26.2%) levels of metaplastic columnar-lined epithelium and in 55 (40.7%) levels of columnar-lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia.
conclusionsThe high proportion of mismatches and tissue heterogeneity observed, especially among columnar-lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia, points to the necessity of determining the histopathology of the research samples to avoid sampling errors during molecular studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21694820PMC3108633W1945734251What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.