Johnson, Michele L.

Goals: To investigate factors predictive of progression from nondysplastic Barrett esophagus (NDBE) or low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) using a large, prospective cohort of patients, wherein all esophageal biopsies undergo expert gastrointestinal pathologist review. Background: Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance to detect incident EAC in the setting of Barrett esophagus (BE), particularly in NDBE patients, is questioned. Previous studies have reported factors predictive of progression to EAC to guide surveillance intervals, but their strength is limited by small sample size and absence of expert gastrointestinal pathologist involvement in esophageal biopsy review. Study: NDBE and LGD subjects were identified from a prospective registry in a tertiary care center. “Progressors” were BE subjects who developed HGD/EAC>12 months after the initial NDBE or LGD diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards model were used to identify predictors of progression. Results: In total, 318 with NDBE and 301 with BE-LGD (mean age, 62.6 y, 85% male) were included. The mean follow-up was 5.3 years. The 7 NDBE and 21 LGD subjects progressed to HGD/EAC. BE length [hazards ratio (HR), 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.29], presence of nodularity (HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.80-11.7), and baseline LGD (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.13-6.57) were significant predictors of progression on multivariate analysis. Conclusions: In this well-defined cohort of NDBE and BE-LGD subjects, BE length, presence of LGD, and nodularity were independent predictors of progression to HGD/EAC. These factors may aid in identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from closer endoscopic surveillance/therapy.

Goals: To determine patient preference for the Barrett esophagus (BE) screening techniques. Background: Sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (sEGD) and unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) are both potential techniques for BE screening. However, systematic assessment of patient preference for these 2 techniques is lacking. As part of a comparative effectiveness randomized trial of BE screening modalities, we measured short-term patient preferences for the following approaches: in-clinic uTNE (huTNE), mobile-based uTNE (muTNE), and sEGD using a novel assessment instrument. Study: Consenting community patients without known BE were randomly assigned to receive huTNE, muTNE, or sEGD, followed by a telephone administered preference and tolerability assessment instrument 24 hours after study procedures. Patient preference was measured by the waiting trade-off method. Results: In total, 201 patients completed screening with huTNE (n=71), muTNE (n=71), or sEGD (n=59), and a telephone interview. Patients’ preferences for sEGD and uTNE using the waiting trade-off method were comparable (P=0.51). Although tolerability scores were superior for sEGD (P<0.001) compared with uTNE, scores for uTNE examinations were acceptable. Conclusions: Patient preference is comparable between sEGD and uTNE for diagnostic examinations conducted in an endoscopy suite or in a mobile setting. Given acceptable tolerability, uTNE may be a viable alternative to sEGD for BE screening.

SummaryBackgroundProton pump inhibitors (PPI) are inconsistently associated with osteoporotic fractures. Barrett's oesophagus (BO) patients are treated with high PPI doses for prolonged periods, but there are limited data on the incidence of osteoporosis and fractures in this group pf patients.AimTo estimate the incidence of (and risk factors for) low bone mass (osteoporosis and/or osteopenia) related fractures in a population‐based BO cohort.MethodsAll subjects with BO and a diagnosis of osteoporosis and fractures were identified using Rochester Epidemiology Project resources. The incidence rates of all and osteoporotic fractures in these subjects were compared to an age‐ and gender similar population in Olmsted County to determine standardised incidence ratios (SIR). Predictors were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsFive hundred and twenty‐one patients were included (median [IQR] age 61 [52, 72] years; 398 [76%] men) of whom 113 (21.7%) had fractures, and 46 (8.8%) had osteoporotic fractures. The incidence of all fractures and osteoporotic fractures was comparable to that of an age‐ and gender‐matched population (SIR 1.09; 95% CI 0.92‐1.29: SIR 1.05; 95% CI 0.85‐1.29). PPI use, dose or duration of use was not associated with osteoporotic fracture risk (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.12‐6.39). Independent risk factors for osteoporotic fractures included older age, female gender and higher co‐morbidity index.ConclusionsThe incidence of osteoporotic fractures was not increased in BO patients compared to the general population. In addition, PPI use was not associated with increased fracture risk regardless of the duration of therapy or dose.

Abstract Background Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) may offer a less expensive, mobile alternative to sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for evaluations of reflux related complications. Comparisons of imaging quality by these methods are lacking. Methods Two reviewers evaluated videos of TNE and EGD procedures, performed during a community randomized study comparing endoscopic techniques. Subjects were randomized to EGD, TNE in endoscopy suite, or TNE in mobile research unit. Endoscopic quality was assessed using a validated scoring tool. Results In total, 115 videos (58 EGD, 28 endoscopy suite TNE, and 29 mobile TNE) were reviewed. Overall quality scores for TNE and EGD were excellent without a statistically significant difference (P = 0.30). There were no differences in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) visualization scores, though EGD scored higher in esophageal passage (P < 0.05) and TNE scored higher in esophageal intubation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in any quality score between mobile TNE and gastrointestinal suite TNE. Conclusion Esophageal assessment with TNE or EGD was comparable in overall quality and GEJ visualization. TNE quality was not affected by procedure location. TNE is a feasible option for endoscopic assessment of reflux complications.

BackgroundWhile central obesity increases gastroesophageal reflux (GER) by mechanically disrupting the anti‐reflux barrier, limited data exist on pathways by which central obesity may potentiate esophageal injury by non‐mechanical means. Obesity has been associated with an impaired epithelial intestinal barrier.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess the influence of central obesity and reflux on the squamous esophageal epithelial intercellular space diameter (ICSD).MethodsThe ICSD was measured using electron microscopy in esophageal biopsies from individuals who underwent ambulatory pH monitoring and endoscopy. Anthropometric measurements were obtained on all participants. Participants were classified into four groups: with and without central obesity and reflux.ResultsSixteen individuals were studied with four in each study group. The mean ICSD was almost three‐fold greater (p < 0.001) in the group with central obesity without reflux, compared to controls without central obesity and reflux. It was also comparable to the ICSD in groups with acid reflux only and those with both reflux and central obesity.ConclusionsThere is evidence of esophageal squamous ICSD increase in individuals with central obesity who do not have evidence of acid and nonacid reflux on ambulatory pH monitoring. This may reflect a mechanism by which central obesity potentiates reflux‐induced esophageal injury and inflammation.