Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38873843›Full record

ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2024

Expert assessment of infiltration depth and recommendation of endoscopic resection technique in early Barrett cancer.

Fadi Younis, Thomas Rösch, Torsten Beyna, Alanna Ebigbo, Siegbert Faiss, Andrea May, Oliver Pech, Philip Dautel, Mario Anders, Till Clauditz and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

13 authors.

Fadi YounisDepartment of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5844-1795
Thomas RöschDepartment of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2270-2495
Torsten BeynaDepartment of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology, Evangelisches Krankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Alanna EbigboDepartment of Gastroenterology, Klinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Siegbert FaissDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sana Klinikum Lichtenberg, Berlin, Germany.
Andrea MayDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Oncology and Pneumology, Asklepios Paulinen Hospital, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Oliver PechDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder, Regensburg, Germany.
Philip DautelDepartment of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Mario AndersDepartment of Gastroenterology and Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, Vivantes Auguste Viktoria Hospital, Berlin, Germany.
Till ClauditzInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Katharina Zimmermann-FraedrichDepartment of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Susanne SehnerDepartment of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Guido SchachschalDepartment of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly Barrett cancer can be curatively treated by endoscopic resection. The choice of the resection technique, however-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or submucosal dissection (ESD)-largely depends on the assumed infiltration depth as judged by the endoscopist. However, the accuracy of endoscopic diagnosis of the degree of cancer infiltration is not known.

methodsThree to four high-quality images (both in overview and close-up) from 202 of early Barrett esophagus cancer cases (82% men, mean age 66.9 years) were selected from our endoscopy database (73.3% stage T1a and 26.7% in stage T1b). Images were shown to 9 Barrett esophagus experts, with patients' clinical data (age, sex, Barrett esophagus length) and biopsy results. The experts were asked to predict infiltration depth (T1b vs. T1a), and to suggest the appropriate endoscopic resection technique (EMR or ESD, or surgery). Interobserver variability (kappa values) was also determined for these parameters.

resultsOverall positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) to diagnose T1b versus T1a infiltration were 40.7% (95% CI: 36.7, 44.8) and 79.8% (95% CI: 77.5, 81.9), respectively; kappa value was 0.41. Paris classification (kappa 0.51) and suggested treatment also varied between experts. In a post hoc analysis, only the correlation between lesions classified as invisible or flat according to the Paris classification (IIB; 25% of all cases) and the suggested resection technique was better: In this subgroup, EMR was recommended in >80% of cases, with a high complete (basal R0) resection rate (mean of 88.1%).

conclusionsPrecise endoscopic distinction between mucosal and submucosal involvement of Barrett esophagus cancer by experts as a basis for choosing the resection technique has limited predictive values and high interobserver variability. It seems that mainly invisible/flat lesions may result in good resection outcomes when treated by EMR, but this stratification strategy has to be assessed in further studies.

Indexed as

Barrett EsophagusEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagoscopyAdenocarcinomaAgedBiopsyEsophageal MucosaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingObserver VariationPredictive Value of TestsBarrett esophagusearly cancerendoscopic resectioninterobserver variabilitystaging

Identifiers

PMID38873843
PMCPMC11497735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.