Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 74, Issue 4 , Pages 761-771, October 2011

Efficacy and safety of EMR to completely remove Barrett's esophagus: experience in 41 patients

Presented at Digestive Disease Week, May 17-22, 2008, San Diego, California (Gastrointest Endosc 2008;67:AB177).

  • Henning Gerke, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Henning Gerke, MD, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Dr, 4548 JCP, Iowa City, IA 52242
  • ,
  • Junaid Siddiqui, MD

      Affiliations

    • Gastroenterology Associates, Round Rock, Texas, USA
  • ,
  • Issam Nasr, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
  • ,
  • Daniel M. Van Handel, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
  • ,
  • Chris S. Jensen, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa

Received 14 March 2011; accepted 14 June 2011. published online 08 August 2011.

Background

EMR is typically used to remove focal abnormalities of the esophageal mucosa. However, larger areas of Barrett's esophagus (BE) can be resected through side-by-side resections.

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of EMR to completely remove BE.

Design

Retrospective, single-center study.

Setting

University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics.

Patients

Between January 2006 and December 2010, 46 patients underwent EMR for complete removal of BE. Three were lost to follow-up, one died of unrelated causes before completion, and one was still undergoing EMR treatment at the conclusion of the study. The remaining 41 patients were included for analysis. The worst histologic grade was low-grade dysplasia in 4 patients, high-grade dysplasia without cancer in 26 patients, and high-grade dysplasia with superficial adenocarcinoma in 11 patients. BE was circumferential in 65.9% of cases, and the mean (± SD) length was 3.3 ± 2.3 cm.

Intervention

EMR was performed by using a cap (n = 4), a multiband ligator device (n = 31), or both (n = 6), with a mean (± SD) of 2.4 ± 1.2 sessions per patient.

Main Outcome Measurements

Remission rates and complications.

Results

Remission of high-grade dysplasia and cancer, all dysplasia, and all BE was achieved in 94.6%, 85.4%, and 78.0%, respectively. Complications included minor bleeding (31.7%), perforations (4.9%), and strictures (43.9%). All complications were managed conservatively.

Limitations

Retrospective design.

Conclusion

Complete removal of BE with EMR is effective but associated with a high complication rate, which is mainly related to stricture formation. This needs to be considered when choosing between available treatment modalities.

Abbreviation: BE, Barrett's esophagus, BLMR, band ligator–assisted mucosal resection, CAMR, cap-assisted mucosal resection, LSBE, long-segment BE, SSBE, short-segment BE

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 DISCLOSURE: All authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.

PII: S0016-5107(11)01786-X

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2011.06.009

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 74, Issue 4 , Pages 761-771, October 2011