Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2019
Real-time diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus: a prospective, multicenter study comparing confocal laser endomicroscopy with conventional histology for the identification of intestinal metaplasia in new users.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Confocal laser endomicroscopy for upper gastrointestinal neoplasia: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Article
- Use of topical methylene blue to image nuclear morphometry with a low-cost scanning darkfield microendoscope.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Optical Biopsies Using Probe-Based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy for Autoimmune Pulmonary Alveolar Proteinosis.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2024Article
- Scanning darkfield high-resolution microendoscope for label-free microvascular imaging.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Review
- The Use of Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy in Diagnosing Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Today's Mistakes and Tomorrow's Wisdom in Endoscopic Imaging of Barrett's Esophagus.Visceral medicine · 2022Review
- SAGES TAVAC safety and efficacy analysis confocal laser endomicroscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Review
- Barrett's Esophagus and Intestinal Metaplasia.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Fluorescent Polymer Dots for Tracking SKOVMolecular imaging and biology · 2019Article
- Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Carcinoma: Can Biomarkers Guide Clinical Practice?Current gastroenterology reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic evaluation with high-definition white light endoscopy and random 4-quadrant biopsy (Seattle Protocol) is the current standard of care for the detection of Barrett's esophagus (BE). Recently, enhanced imaging technologies have become available to provide real-time diagnosis of intestinal metaplasia (IM) and dysplasia, reducing the need for tissue biopsy. Probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) provides dynamic microscopic mucosal views, rapidly capturing digital images that become optical biopsies. This study examined the role of pCLE in BE screening and surveillance as compared to the Seattle Protocol.
methodsPatients undergoing BE screening or surveillance endoscopy were enrolled at eight US centers. Optical biopsy using pCLE was interpreted in real time. Endoscopists performing pCLE were new users with a median experience of 8.5 months and no formal training in surgical pathology. Seattle Protocol biopsies were then taken. Recorded pCLE images were reviewed by a blinded expert in optical biopsy interpretation.
resultsEarly pCLE users identified significantly more patients with IM than the Seattle Protocol overall (99/172 vs. 46/172, p < 0.0001). Early users of pCLE also identified significantly more patients with IM than the Seattle Protocol in the patients with visible columnar lined esophagus (75 vs. 31, p < 0.0001), but not in the 76 patients without columnar lined esophagus (24 vs. 15, p = 0.067). There was no statistically significant difference between early pCLE users and expert review.
conclusionOptical biopsy using pCLE technology allows for the real-time evaluation of entire segments of columnar lined esophagus. Consequently, pCLE is considerably more sensitive in the detection of BE than the Seattle Protocol, which leaves a majority of epithelium unexamined. This effect is seen even in new users and increases with experience. Overall, pCLE provides a promising advance in Barrett's detection which will likely result in superior identification of individuals at risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.