Codipilly, D Chamil

Abstract This literature‐based systematic review and associated guidelines provide evidence‐based paradigms for the management of locoregionally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). This multispecialty committee included gastrointestinal radiation and medical oncology, gastroenterology, radiology, and colorectal surgery. As is the standard, the previously described American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria methodology for this project was followed rigorously, with the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, and Study Design framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses methodology to assess the evidence. RAND/University of California Los Angeles consensus methodology (modified Delphi) was used to rate the appropriateness of treatment options. Published between January 1, 2013, and July 16, 2025, 116 peer‐reviewed trials provided the evidence: 10 were well‐designed randomized phase 2/3 trials, 29 were moderately well designed trials that accounted for most common biases (matched cohort and phase 2), 76 trials had design limitations (retrospective), and one was a meta‐analysis. Clinical cases were created as examples to illustrate current acceptable management of LRRC. Treatment and prognosis are influenced by prior therapy and the site(s) and extent of LRRC. The ability to achieve a margin‐negative surgical resection is the ultimate determinant of survival and local control. Preoperative systemic therapy, radiation therapy, or a combination of the two can facilitate tumor downsizing and improve the likelihood of a margin‐negative resection. An individualized multidisciplinary approach is required to ensure the best outcome. Although this review does not suggest a major alteration of current practice, it provides reassuring evidence of the importance of combined‐modality therapy.

Purpose of review A substantial proportion of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) cases in Barrett's esophagus (BE) are diagnosed after a dysplasia-negative endoscopy before the next recommended surveillance interval. These are classified as postendoscopy esophageal carcinoma (PEEC) or postendoscopy esophageal neoplasia (PEEN) and represent critical failures of BE surveillance. This review summarizes current definitions, epidemiology, potential etiologies, and evolving strategies to reduce PEEC/PEEN and improve the quality of BE surveillance. Recent findings High-quality endoscopic examination using high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WLE) and virtual chromoendoscopy (CE), adherence to the Seattle biopsy protocol, adequate inspection time, and training in the recognition of visible lesions harboring prevalent dysplasia/EAC, are critical in reducing PEEC/PEEN. Initial data on the use of adjunctive tools (wide-area transepithelial sampling) and molecular biomarkers (p53, DNA methylation panels, and Tissue Systems Pathology tests) demonstrate promising results for detecting prevalent dysplasia and for reducing PEEC and PEEN. BE surveillance quality metrics, such as cancer and neoplasia detection rates, have been shown to be inversely associated with PEEN. Summary PEEC and PEEN reflect critical gaps in the effectiveness of BE surveillance. Improving the quality of endoscopic surveillance is essential, including meticulous mucosal inspection, appropriate use of advanced imaging techniques, and adherence to systematic biopsy protocols, to minimize missed neoplasia.

Abstract Dysphagia is defined as a subjective sensation of difficulty swallowing and can result from oropharyngeal or esophageal etiologies based upon patient symptoms. Dysphagia affects approximately 16% of adults in the general population, with prevalence increasing with age. Esophagogastroduodenuoscopy (EGD) is initially performed to assess for structural abnormalities resulting in esophageal dysphagia. However, if EGD reveals no pathologic abnormalities, high-resolution manometry (HRM) and barium esophagography are performed in order to assess for underlying causes of dysmotility. Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) are an underrecognized cause of dysphagia and can be characterized by impaired esophageal peristalsis or lower esophageal sphincter dysfunction. High-resolution manometry (HRM) measures key metrics such as integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), which is the deglutitive relaxation across the LES, and metrics of esophageal body peristalsis based on distal contractile integral (DCI) and distal latency (DL). The Chicago Classification version 4 (CCv4.0), published in 2021, provides a standardized classification scheme for differentiating EMDs using metrics from HRM. Additionally, barium esophagography has remained an important adjunctive diagnostic modality, as this may identify strictures, neoplasms, or hiatal hernias, but can also identify major motility disorders such as achalasia and distal esophageal spasm. The combined use of HRM with timed barium esophagram can enhance the diagnostic accuracy of EMDs, particularly when HRM demonstrates inconclusive findings. Therefore, radiologists should be familiar with how imaging findings from barium esophagram integrate with findings noted on HRM. The aim of this review is to highlight the findings of EMDs noted on HRM in conjunction with barium esophagography, thereby illustrating characteristic patterns of primary and secondary EMDs.