Citations

Clear

6 citation(s) found for "Goyal, Rohit".

Postendoscopy esophageal adenocarcinoma and neoplasia: current status and future directions
Goyal, Rohit, Codipilly, D Chamil, Iyer, Prasad G. , Goyal, Rohit , Codipilly, Don C.

Mayo Clinic

Current Opinion in Gastroenterology | June 4, 2026 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 288-297

10.1097/mog.0000000000001172 | PMID 42239986 Get It

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.
An Unexpected Culprit: Fatal Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage due to Duodenal Histoplasmosis in a Patient With End-Stage Renal Disease
Rai, Vanya, Goyal, Rohit , Vyas, Aditya , Sachdeva, Karan , Arora, Kshitij S. , Zia, Hassan, Rai, Vanya

Mayo Clinic

ACG Case Reports Journal | August 1, 2025 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 8 | Pages: e01781

10.14309/crj.0000000000001781 | PMID 40757075 Get It

ABSTRACT Histoplasmosis has a wide spectrum of presentations ranging from mild pulmonary disease to a more widespread infection leading to disseminated histoplasmosis. Gastrointestinal histoplasmosis is a rare form of disseminated histoplasmosis that most commonly causes nonspecific symptoms and rarely presents with serious symptoms. Duodenal involvement is further rare but can cause ulcerated lesions leading to upper gastrointestinal bleed. The potential for a nonspecific initial presentation quickly progressing to a fatal upper gastrointestinal bleed makes it important to keep Gastrointestinal histoplasmosis in our list of differentials, as timely initiation of appropriate antifungal therapy can significantly reduce the risk of severe complications and mortality.
Addressing False Positives in Barrett’s Esophagus Screening With Swallowable Cell Collection Devices+ Biomarker Tests
Goyal, Rohit , Iyer, Prasad G.

Mayo Clinic

Foregut: The Journal of the American Foregut Society | July 11, 2025 | Volume: 5 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 306-309

10.1177/26345161251355651 Get It

In this brief review we discuss the potential reasons underlying and follow up of patients who have a positive non-endoscopic swallowable cell collection device+biomarker (such as TFF3) test but no evidence of Barrett’s esophagus on endoscopy. We discuss the potential role of careful examination of the gastroesophageal junction and targeted biopsies of any visible lesions, as well endoscopic follow up in 3-5 years in the absence of any alarm symptoms. Considerations of the use of new technologies such as wide area transepithelial sampling in this situation are also discussed.
Journey to complete remission of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia after ESD and EMR of Barrett’s esophagus-related neoplasia
Joseph, Abel , Vantanasiri, Kornpong , Garg, Nikita , Codipilly, Don C. , Wang, Kenneth T. , Harmsen, William S. , Jang, Sunguk, Iyer, Prasad G. , Bhatt, Amit, Bhatt, Amit , Leggett, Cadman, Iyer, Prasad, Bhatt, Amit , Goyal, Rohit, Leggett, Cadman L. , Vargo, John Joseph

Mayo Clinic

Endoscopy International Open | March 18, 2025 | Volume: 13 | Issue: CP | Pages: No page available

10.1055/a-2422-2815 | PMID 40376017 Get It

AbstractAlthough endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is associated with higher en-bloc and R0 resection rates than cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR), its comparative impact on achieving complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) and intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) in BE endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is not well defined. We aimed to compare the journey of patients from initial endoscopic resection (ER) with ESD and cEMR to achieving CRD and CRIM.Patients undergoing ESD or cEMR followed by ablation for BE neoplasia at two academic institutions in the United States were included. Primary outcomes included CRD and CRIM rates following ER in the two groups. Secondary outcomes included the number of resection/ablative procedures from initial ER to achieving CRD and CRIM. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance confounding variables between groups.A total of 801 patients (606 cEMR, 195 ESD) were included. ESD group patients had higher en-bloc resection rates (ESD 94.4%, cEMR 44.7%). Higher rates of CRD were observed in patients undergoing initial ESD (HR 1.53, P < 0.01). With time-to-event and IPTW analyses, rates of achieving CRD and CRIM were comparable between the groups. There were no significant differences in mean number of endoscopic resection or ablative procedures among patients undergoing initial cEMR resection compared with those treated with initial ESD.Despite larger lesion sizes and more cancers in patients undergoing ESD, the EET journey to achieving CRD and CRIM was comparable to that in patients receiving cEMR. Prospective studies are required to further study differences between these two treatment approaches.
Rates of Recurrent Intestinal Metaplasia and Dysplasia After Successful Endoscopic Therapy of Barrett's Neoplasia by Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Ablation: A Large North American Multicenter Cohort
Vantanasiri, Kornpong , Joseph, Abel , Sachdeva, Karan , Goyal, Rohit , Garg, Nikita , Adoor, Dayyan , Kamboj, Amrit K. , Codipilly, Don C. , Leggett, Cadman L. , Wang, Kenneth K. , Harmsen, William S. , Hayat, Umar , Chak, Amitabh , Bhatt, Amit , Iyer, Prasad G. , Codipilly, Don Chamil , Leggett, Cadman L , Bhatt, Amit , Vantanasiri, Kornpong

Mayo Clinic

American Journal of Gastroenterology | April 8, 2024 | Volume: 119 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1831-1840

10.14309/ajg.0000000000002798 | PMID 38587280 Get It

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) combining endoscopic resection (ER) with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) followed by ablation is the standard of care for the treatment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). We have previously shown comparable rates of complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) with both approaches. However, data comparing recurrence after CRIM are lacking. We compared rates of recurrence after CRIM with both techniques in a multicenter cohort. METHODS: Patients undergoing EET achieving CRIM at 3 academic institutions were included. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted. Outcomes included rates and predictors of any BE and dysplastic BE recurrence in the 2 groups. Cox-proportional hazards models and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis were used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 621 patients (514 EMR and 107 ESD) achieving CRIM were included in the recurrence analysis. The incidence of any BE (15.7, 5.7 per 100 patient-years) and dysplastic BE recurrence (7.3, 5.3 per 100 patient-years) were comparable in the EMR and ESD groups, respectively. On multivariable analyses, the chances of BE recurrence were not influenced by ER technique (hazard ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.51–1.49; P = 0.62), which was also confirmed by IPTW analysis (ESD vs EMR: hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.56–1.73; P = 0.94). BE length, lesion size, and history of cigarette smoking were independent predictors of BE recurrence. DISCUSSION: Patients with BE dysplasia/neoplasia achieving CRIM, initially treated with EMR/ablation, had comparable recurrence rates to ESD/ablation. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these outcomes between the 2 ER techniques.
Clinical Outcomes After Endoscopic Management of Low-Risk and High-Risk T1a Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study
Kamboj, Amrit K. , Vantanasiri, Kornpong , Sachdeva, Karan , Passe, Melissa, Lansing, Ramona, Garg, Nikita , Chandi, Paras Singh , Ramirez, Francisco C. , Kahn, Allon , Wolfsen, Herbert C. , Krishna, Murli , Pai, Rish K. , Hagen, Catherine E. , Lee, Hee Eun , Wang, Kenneth K. , Leggett, Cadman L. , Iyer, Prasad G. , Vantanasiri, Kornpong , Chandi, Paras S , Kahn, Allon , Fukami, Norio , Hagen, Catherine, Leggett, Cadman L , Hagen, Catherine E , Goyal, Rohit, Fukami, Norio

Mayo Clinic

American Journal of Gastroenterology | October 5, 2023 | Volume: 119 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 662-670

10.14309/ajg.0000000000002554 | PMID 37795907 Get It

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is standard of care for T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, data on outcomes in high-risk T1a EAC are limited. We assessed and compared outcomes after EET of low-risk and high-risk T1a EAC, including intraluminal EAC recurrence, extraesophageal metastases, and overall survival. METHODS: Patients who underwent EET for T1a EAC at 3 referral Barrett's esophagus endotherapy units between 1996 and 2022 were included. Patients with submucosal invasion, positive deep margins, or metastases at initial diagnosis were excluded. High-risk T1a EAC was defined as T1a EAC with poor differentiation and/or lymphovascular invasion, with low-risk disease being defined without these features. All pathology was systematically assessed by expert gastrointestinal pathologists. Baseline and follow-up endoscopy and pathology data were abstracted. Time-to-event analyses were performed to compare outcomes between groups. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-eight patients with T1a EAC were included (high risk, n = 45; low risk, n = 143) with a median age of 70 years, and 84% were men. Groups were comparable for age, sex, Barrett's esophagus length, lesion size, and EET technique. Rates of delayed extraesophageal metastases (11.1% vs 1.4%) were significantly higher in the high-risk group ( P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the rates of intraluminal EAC recurrence ( P = 0.79) and overall survival ( P = 0.73) between the 2 groups. DISCUSSION: Patients with high-risk T1a EAC undergoing successful EET had a substantially higher rate of extraesophageal metastases compared with those with low-risk T1a EAC on long-term follow-up. These data should be factored into discussions with patients while selecting treatment approaches. Additional prospective data in this area are critical.