Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25817897›Full record

ArticleGastrointestinal endoscopy2015

Recurrent intestinal metaplasia after radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's esophagus: endoscopic findings and anatomic location.

Cary C Cotton, W Asher Wolf, Sarina Pasricha, Nan Li, Ryan D Madanick, Melissa B Spacek, Kathleen Ferrell, Evan S Dellon, Nicholas J Shaheen

Abstract readClinical Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. AGA Clinical Practice Update on New Technology and Innovation for Surveillance and Screening in Barrett's Esophagus: Expert Review.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Durability of Endoscopic Treatment for Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019
    Review
  12. Challenges in Endoscopic Therapy of Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Natural History of the Post-ablation Esophagus.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018
    Review
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Quality Indicators in Endoscopic Ablation for Barrett's Esophagus.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Cary C CottonCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
W Asher WolfCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Sarina PasrichaCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Nan LiCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Ryan D MadanickCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Melissa B SpacekCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Kathleen FerrellCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Evan S DellonCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Nicholas J ShaheenCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

PILOT AND FEASIBILITY STUDIESP30DK034987 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ROBERT S. SANDLER · 1985 to 2026
$30.5M
DIGESTIVE DISEASES EPIDEMIOLOGY TRAINING PROGRAMT32DK007634 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ROBERT S. SANDLER · 1990 to 2026
$7.4M
Non-Endoscopic Surveillance for Barrett's Esophagus Following Ablative TherapyK24DK100548 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SHAHEEN, NICHOLAS J · 2013 to 2017
$896k
Risk Factors and Biomarkers for Diagnosis & Treatment of Eosinophilic EsophagitisK23DK090073 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DELLON, EVAN SAMUEL · 2011 to 2013
$541k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK090073NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK100548NIDDK NIH HHS K24DK100548NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK 034987NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK034987NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK 007634NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007634
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a safe and effective treatment for Barrett's esophagus (BE) that results in high rates of complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CEIM). However, recurrence is common after CEIM, and surveillance endoscopy is recommended. Neither the anatomic location nor the endoscopic appearance of these recurrences is well-described.

objectiveDescribe the location of histologic specimens positive for recurrence after CEIM and the testing performance of endoscopic findings for the histopathologic detection of recurrence.

designRetrospective cohort.

settingSingle referral center. PATIENTS: A total of 198 patients with BE with at least 2 surveillance endoscopies after CEIM.

interventionsRFA, EMR, surveillance endoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The anatomic location and histologic grade of recurrence.

resultsIn a mean 3.0 years of follow-up, 32 (16.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.0%-22.0%) patients had recurrence of disease, 5 (2.5%; 95% CI, 0.3%-4.7%) of whom progressed beyond their worst before-treatment histology. Recurrence was most common at or near the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). Recurrence>1 cm proximal to the GEJ always was accompanied by endoscopic findings, and random biopsies in these areas detected no additional cases. The sensitivity of any esophageal sign under high-definition white light or narrow-band imaging for recurrence was 59.4% (42.4%, 76.4%), and the specificity was 80.6% (77.2%, 84.0%). LIMITATIONS: Single-center study.

conclusionRecurrent intestinal metaplasia often is not visible to the endoscopist and is most common near the GEJ. Random biopsies>1 cm above the GEJ had no yield for recurrence. In addition to biopsy of prior EMR sites and of suspicious lesions, random biopsies oversampling the GEJ are recommended.

Indexed as

Catheter AblationAgedBarrett EsophagusBiopsyCohort StudiesEsophagogastric JunctionEsophagoscopyEsophagusFemaleGastroscopyHumansMaleMiddle AgedNarrow Band ImagingRecurrenceRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID25817897
PMCPMC4439393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.