Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan;20(1):65-73.e1.
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.11.017. Epub 2020 Nov 18.

Comparative Outcomes of Cap Assisted Endoscopic Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus

Affiliations

Comparative Outcomes of Cap Assisted Endoscopic Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus

D Chamil Codipilly et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Jan.

Abstract

Background & aims: Endoscopic resection is an important component of the endoscopic treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with dysplasia and intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic resection can be performed by cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We compared the histologic outcomes of ESD vs cEMR, followed by ablation.

Methods: We queried a prospectively maintained database of all patients undergoing cEMR and ESD followed by ablation at our institution from January 2006 to March 2020 and abstracted relevant demographic and clinical data. Our primary outcomes included the rate of complete remission of dysplasia (CRD): absence of dysplasia on surveillance histology, and complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM): absence of intestinal metaplasia. Our secondary outcome included complication rates.

Results: We included 537 patients in the study: 456 underwent cEMR and 81 underwent ESD. The cumulative probabilities of CRD at 2 years were 75.8% and 85.6% in the cEMR and ESD groups, respectively (P < .01). Independent predictors of CRD were as follows: ESD (hazard ratio [HR], 2.38; P < .01) and shorter BE segment length (HR, 1.11; P < .01). The cumulative probabilities of CRIM at 2 years were 59.3% and 50.6% in the cEMR and ESD groups, respectively (P > .05). The only independent predictor of CRIM was a shorter BE segment (HR, 1.16; P < .01).

Conclusions: BE patients with dysplasia or intramucosal adenocarcinoma undergoing ESD reach CRD at higher rates than those treated with cEMR, although CRIM rates at 2 years and complication rates were similar between the 2 groups.

Keywords: Barrett’s Esophagus; Endoscopic Eradication Therapy; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection; Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
A. A nodular area is noted in BE mucosa. B. The margins of the lesion are marked with cautery. C. Methylene blue saline injection in utilized to lift the lesion. D. Dissection proceeds utilizing the Hook Knife (Olympus USA, Center Valley, PA). E. The dissection bed after removal of the lesion. F. Pinning of the resected lesion to Styrofoam.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Kaplan-Meier curve for achieving complete remission of dysplasia. At 2 years, the rates of achieving CRD were higher (p< 0.01) in the ESD group (85.6%; 95%CI: 70.5%–94.3%) compared to the cEMR group (75.8%; 95%CI: 71.4%–79.5%).
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Kaplan-Meier curve for achieving complete remission of intestinal metaplasia. At 2 years, rates of achieving CRIM in the ESD group (50.6%; 95%CI: 34.9%–69.0%) and the cEMR group (59.3%; 95%CI: 54.3%–63.7%) were comparable (p = 0.11).

Comment in

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics,2019. CA Cancer J Clin 2019;69:7–34. - PubMed
    1. Krishnamoorthi R, Singh S, Ragunathan K, et al. Risk of recurrence of Barrett’s esophagus after successful endoscopic therapy. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;83: 1090–1106.e3. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Namasivayam V, Wang KK, Prasad GA. Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in the Management of Esophageal Neoplasia: Current Status and Future Directions. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2010;8:743–754. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wani S, Mathur SC, Curvers WL, et al. Greater Interobserver Agreement by Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Than Biopsy Samples in Barrett’s Dysplasia. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2010;8:783–788.e2. - PubMed
    1. Prasad GA, Buttar NS, Wongkeesong LM, et al. Significance of neoplastic involvement of margins obtained by endoscopic mucosal resection in Barrett’s esophagus. American Journal of Gastroenterology 2007;102:2380–2386. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms