Ramirez, Francisco C.

Background. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a validated quality measure for screening colonoscopy, but there are little data for other indications. The distribution of adenomas is not well described for these indications. Aim. To describe ADR and the adenoma distribution in the proximal and distal colon based on colonoscopy indication. Methods. Outpatient colonoscopies are subdivided by indication. PDR and ADR for the entire colon and for proximal and distal colon. Data were compared using generalized estimating equations to adjust for clustering amongst endoscopists while controlling for patient age and gender. Results. 3436 colonoscopies were reviewed (51.2%: men (n=1759)). Indications are screening 49.2%, surveillance 29.3%, change in bowel habit 8.4%, bleeding 5.8%, colitides 3.0%, pain 2.8%, and miscellaneous 1.5%. Overall ADR was 37% proximal ADR 28%, and distal ADR 17%. PDR and ADR were significantly higher in surveillance than in screening (PDR: 69% versus 51%; ADR: 50% versus 33%; p=0.0001). Adenomas were more often detected in the proximal than in the distal colon, for all indications. Conclusions. Prevalence of polyps and adenomas differs based on colonoscopy indication. Adenoma detection is highest in surveillance and more commonly detected in the proximal colon. For quality assurance, distinct ADR and PDR targets may need to be established for different colonoscopy indications.

AbstractBackground and AimFeedback has been shown to improve performance in colonoscopy including adenoma detection rate (ADR). The frequency at which feedback should be given is unknown. As part of a quality improvement program, we sought to measure the outcome of providing quarterly and monthly feedback on colonoscopy quality measures.MethodsAll screening colonoscopies performed at endoscopy unit at Mayo Clinic Arizona by gastroenterologists between October 2010 and December 2012 were reviewed. Quality indicators, including ADR, were extracted for each individual endoscopist, and feedback was provided. The study period was divided into four distinct groups: pre‐intervention that served as baseline, quarterly feedback, monthly feedback, and post‐intervention. Based on ADR, endoscopists were grouped into “low detectors” (≤ 25%), “average detectors” (26–35%), and “high detectors” (> 35%).ResultsA total of 3420 screening colonoscopies were performed during the study period (555 patients during pre‐intervention, 1209 patients during quarterly feedback, 599 during monthly feedback, and 1057 during the post‐intervention period) by 16 gastroenterologists. The overall ADR for the group improved from 30.5% to 37.7% (P = 0.003). Compared with the pre‐interventional period, all quality indicators measured significantly improved during the monthly feedback and post‐intervention periods but not in the quarterly feedback period.ConclusionsIn our quality improvement program, monthly feedback significantly improved colonoscopy quality measures, including ADR, while quarterly feedback did not. The impact of the intervention was most prominent in the “low detectors” group. Results were durable up to 6 months following the intervention.

165 Background: Distant metastases are common in primary esophageal cancer, but data conflict regarding the rates of brain metastases (BM) ranging from 0% to 13%. We sought to investigate whether the incidence of BM from esophageal malignancies is increasing in the modern era. Methods: After IRB approval, a single institution retrospective review identified 583 patients (pts) treated between 1/1997 and 1/2016 for stage I-IV cancer of the esophagus/esophagogastric junction with at least 3 months follow-up. Data collected included demographic information, primary diagnosis date and staging, histologic subtype, treatment regimens for primary and BM, date of BM diagnosis, status of neurologic symptoms and extracranial disease at BM diagnosis, and date of death. Data were analyzed by Fischer’s exact test and Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: The overall cohort was comprised of 495 pts (85%) with adenocarcinoma and 82 pts (14%) with squamous cell carcinoma. 492 pts (84%) were male; the median age was 68 years (range 26-90). BM were identified in 22 pts (3.8%) with a median latency of 11 months from the primary diagnosis. Of the pts with BM, the primary histology was adenocarcinoma in 21 pts and squamous cell carcinoma in 1 pt ( P = 0.3). BM developed in 12 pts who were initially treated for locally advanced disease and in 10 pts who presented with distant metastases. Diagnosis of BM was at the time of initial presentation in 4 of these 10 stage IV pts. A solitary BM was identified in 9 pts. Initial treatments of BM were surgical resection followed by stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS; n = 5); surgical resection followed by whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT; n = 1); WBRT alone (n = 13); SRS alone (n = 3). Overall survival (OS) following diagnosis of BM was 18% at 1 year with a median of 4 months. OS was superior for pts who had surgical resection as initial treatment of BM compared to pts treated with WBRT or SRS alone (1-year OS 67 vs. 0%; median OS 13.5 vs. 3 months; P = 0.003). Conclusions: The incidence of BM is low in esophageal cancer with no statistically significant increased rate of BM developing in patients with adenocarcinoma compared with squamous cell carcinoma. Outcomes were poor overall for pts who developed BM, but pts who were appropriate for neurosurgical resection had improved survival.

134 Background: Brain metastasis (BM) is an uncommon site of failure in patients (pts) with esophageal cancer (EC) with reported rates between 1-6%. EC pts are living longer with the wider adoption of trimodality therapy and, as with other malignancies, this may change the patterns of failure. We evaluated the incidence and outcomes of BM in EC at Mayo Clinic in Arizona. Methods: A retrospective review identified pts who developed BM from cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. A total of 321 patients treated for stage I-IV EC (adenocarcinoma, n = 273; squamous, n = 46; small cell, n = 2) were identified between 1997 and 2012. Fisher’s exact test was used for comparisons. Actuarial survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: BM developed in 13 pts (4%), all of whom had adenocarcinoma. Nine pts initially presented with T3 and/or node-positive disease. Four pts presented with metastatic disease to other sites, but only 1 of this group was diagnosed with BM at initial presentation. The median time from initial diagnosis to BM detection was 12 months (range 0-40). All pts were symptomatic at diagnosis. BM was solitary in 6 pts, multiple in 6 pts, and unknown in 1 pt. The posterior fossa was involved in 9 pts. The brain represented the first site of failure in 9 pts. Treatment included surgical resection (n = 5), stereotactic radiosurgery (n = 4), and whole brain radiotherapy (n = 9). Median overall survival was 24 months from initial diagnosis and 5 months from BM detection. Among pts with adenocarcinoma, 3/119 (2.5%) were diagnosed between 1997-2006 compared to 10/154 (6.5%) between 2007-2012 (P = 0.1). Conclusions: The brain remains an uncommon site of failure among pts with EC. A recent series reported an incidence of BM in 13% of pts, raising the possibility of a changing failure pattern. In our series, BM was detected in only 4% of pts. Our study is suggestive of a trend towards increased incidence of BM in more recent years, although it did not reach statistical significance and could be a consequence of the retrospective nature of the study. Both series found BM limited only to pts with adenocarcinoma, and a possible association has been reported between HER-2 overexpression and BM in EC. Therefore, BM in EC may be an interesting area for future study.

20 Background: Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) incidence is rising and prognosis is uniformly poor, even with early stage disease. Barrett esophagus (BE) serves as a premalignant marker for EAC, with an estimated progression of 0.5% per year. Low-grade (LGD) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) confer a higher risk of progression, providing an opportunity for intervention and surveillance. Aims: To evaluate a large cohort of patients undergoing endoscopic evaluation of BE and thereby better understand the natural history of BE and dysplasia. Methods: A retrospective review of endoscopic databases was conducted for all patients with the diagnosis of BE undergoing upper endoscopy at a tertiary academic medical center from 1991-2010. All endoscopy and accompanying pathology reports were reviewed. Only those patients with 2 biopsies documenting specialized intestinal metaplasia were analyzed. Results: 848 patients underwent upper endoscopy for evaluation of BE. Of these, 674 patients met inclusion criteria, at a mean follow up of 66.6 months. Table 1 depicts the distribution of patients according to their histology at presentation. 22 (3.2%) patients presented with established EAC, while EAC developed in 51 (7.6%). Of patients with HGD, LGD, or no dysplasia (ND) at presentation, EAC ultimately developed in 30.6%, 6.6%, and 2.7%, respectively. EAC developed in 4 patients despite RFA treatment for ND (2) or LGD (2). HGD developed in 6 such patients after treatment for ND (3) and LGD (3). Only 1 patient in each RFA-treated cohort required esophagectomy, while the others cleared dysplasia or EAC with continuous treatment. Conclusions: In this large cohort of patients with Barrett’s esophagus, higher grade of dysplasia at first endoscopy was associated with development of EAC. Continuous surveillance during and after endoscopic treatment is necessary and often results in clearance of dysplasia and EAC. [Table: see text]

Duodenal aspirates are not commonly collected, but they can be easily used in detection of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO). Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use has been proposed to contribute to the development of SIBO. We aimed to determine the yield of SIBO-positive cultures detected in duodenal aspirates, the relationship between SIBO and PPI use, and the clinical outcomes of patients identified by this method. In a retrospective study, we analyzed electronic medical records from 1263 consecutive patients undergoing upper endoscopy at a tertiary medical center. Aspirates were collected thought out the third and fourth portions of the duodenum, and cultures were considered to be positive for SIBO if they produced more than 100,000 cfu/mL. Culture analysis of duodenal aspirates identified SIBO in one-third of patients. A significantly higher percentage of patients with SIBO use PPIs than patients without SIBO, indicating a possible association. Similar proportions of patients with SIBO improved whether or not they received antibiotic treatment, calling into question the use of this expensive therapy for this disorder.

Background. Appropriate recommendations for a followup exam after an index colonoscopy are an important quality indicator. Lack of knowledge of polyp pathology at the time of colonoscopy may be one reason that followup recommendations are not made. Aim. To describe and compare the accuracy of followup recommendations made at colonoscopy based on the size and number of polyps with recommendations made at a later date based on actual polyp pathology. Methods. All patients who underwent screening and surveillance colonoscopy from March, 2012, to August, 2012, were included. Surveillance recommendations from the endoscopy reports were graded as “accurate” or “not accurate” based on the postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines established by US Multisociety Task Force on Colon Cancer. Polyp pathology was then used to regrade the surveillance recommendations. Results. Followup recommendations were accurate in 759/884 (86%) of the study colonoscopies, based upon size and number of polyps with the assumption that all polyps were adenomatous. After incorporating actual polyp pathology, 717/884 (81%) colonoscopies had accurate recommendations. Conclusion. In our practice, the knowledge of actual polyp pathology does not change the surveillance recommendations made at the time of colonoscopy in the majority of patients.