Barrett\'s esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia.
The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.
The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics.
This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) develops in a step-wise manner, from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD), and ultimately to invasive EAC. However, there remains diagnostic uncertainty about LGD and its risk of progression to HGD/EAC. The aim is to investigate the role of Ki-67, immune-histochemical marker of proliferation, surface expression in patients with confirmed LGD, and risk stratify progression to HGD/EAC. A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with confirmed LGD and indefinite for dysplasia (IND), with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year, were included. Pathology specimens were stained for Ki-67 and analyzed for evidence of surface expression. Our results reveal that 29% of patients with confirmed LGD who stained positive with Ki-67 progressed to HGD/EAC as opposed to none (0%) of the patients who stained negative, a statistically significant result (P = 0.003). Similarly, specimens from patients with IND were stained and analyzed revealing a nonsignificant trend toward a higher rate of progression for Ki-67 positive cases versus Ki-67 negative, 30% versus 21%, respectively. Ki-67 expression by itself can identify patients with LGD at a high risk of progression.

Endoscopic resection (ER) is an important diagnostic step in management of patients with early Barrett\'s esophagus (BE) neoplasia. Based on ER specimens, an accurate histological diagnosis can be made, which guides further treatment. Based on depth of tumor invasion, differentiation grade, lymphovascular invasion, and margin status, the risk of lymph node metastases and local recurrence is judged to be low enough to justify endoscopic management, or high enough to warrant invasive surgical esophagectomy. Adequate assessment of these histological risk factors is therefore of the utmost importance. Aim of this study was to assess pathologist concordance on these histological features on ER specimens and evaluate causes of discrepancy. Of 62 challenging ER cases, one representative H&E slide and matching desmin and endothelial marker were digitalized and independently assessed by 13 dedicated GI pathologists from 8 Dutch BE expert centers, using an online assessment module. For each histological feature, concordance and discordance were calculated. Clinically relevant discordances were observed for all criteria. Grouping depth of invasion categories according to expanded endoscopic treatment criteria (T1a and T1sm1 vs. T1sm2/3), ≥1 pathologist was discrepant in 21% of cases, increasing to 45% when grouping diagnoses according to the traditional T1a versus T1b classification. For differentiation grade, lymphovascular invasion, and margin status, discordances were substantial with 27%, 42%, and 32% of cases having ≥1 discrepant pathologist, respectively. In conclusion, histological assessment of ER specimens of early BE cancer by dedicated GI pathologists shows significant discordances for all relevant histological features. We present propositions to improve definitions of diagnostic criteria.

Multiple guidelines on Barrett\'s esophagus (BE) have being published in order to standardize and improve clinical practice. However, studies have shown poor adherence to them. Our aim was to synthetize, compare, and assess the quality of recommendations from recently published guidelines, stressing similarities and differences. We conducted a search in Pubmed and Scopus. When different guidelines from the same society were identified, the most recent one was considered. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence. We included 24 guidelines and position/consensus statements from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, British Society of Gastroenterology, American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, American Gastroenterological Association, American College of Gastroenterology, Australian guidelines, and Asia-Pacific consensus. All guidelines defend that BE should be diagnosed when there is an extension of columnar epithelium into the distal esophagus. However, there is still some controversy regarding length and histology criteria for BE diagnosis. All guidelines recommend expert pathologist review for dysplasia diagnosis. All guidelines recommend surveillance for non-dysplastic BE, and some recommend surveillance for indefinite dysplasia. While the majority of guidelines recommend ablation therapy for low-grade dysplasia without visible lesion, others recommend ablation therapy or endoscopic surveillance. However, controversy exists regarding surveillance intervals and biopsy protocols. All guidelines recommend endoscopic resection followed by ablation therapy for neoplastic visible lesion. Several guidelines use the GRADE system, but the majority of recommendations are based on low and moderate quality of evidence. Although there is considerable consensus among guidelines, there are some discrepancies resulting from low-quality evidence. The lack of high-quality evidence for the majority of recommendations highlights the importance of continued well-conducted research in this field.

Little is known on practice patterns of endoscopists for the management of Barrett\'s esophagus (BE) over the last decade.
Our aim was to assess practice patterns of endoscopists for the diagnosis, surveillance and treatment of BE.
All members of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) were invited to participate to a questionnaire-based survey. The questionnaire included questions on demographic and professional characteristics, and on diagnosis and management strategies for BE.
Of the 883 SIED members, 259 (31.1%) completed the questionnaire. Of these, 73% were males, 42.9% had > 50 years of age and 68.7% practiced in community hospitals. The majority (82.9%) of participants stated to use the Prague classification; however 34.5% did not use the top of gastric folds to identify the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ); only 51.4% used advanced endoscopy imaging routinely. Almost all respondents practiced endoscopic surveillance for non-dysplastic BE, but 43.7% performed eradication in selected cases and 30% practiced surveillance every 1-2 years. The majority of endoscopists managed low-grade dysplasia with surveillance (79.1%) and high-grade dysplasia with ablation (77.1%). Attending a training course on BE in the previous 5 years was significantly associated with the use of the Prague classification (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.9-12.1), the top of gastric folds as landmark for the GEJ (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.27-4.74) and advanced imaging endoscopic techniques (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.53-7.29).
Practice patterns for management of BE among endoscopists are variable. Attending training courses on BE improves adherence to guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Two reviews and an overview were produced for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care guideline on screening for esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) without alarm symptoms. The goal was to systematically review three key questions (KQs): (1) The effectiveness of screening for these conditions; (2) How adults with chronic GERD weigh the benefits and harms of screening, and what factors contribute to their preferences and decision to undergo screening; and (3) Treatment options for Barrett\'s esophagus (BE), dysplasia or stage 1 EAC (overview of reviews).
METHODS: Bibliographic databases (e.g. Ovid MEDLINE®) were searched for each review in October 2018. We also searched for unpublished literature (e.g. relevant websites). The liberal accelerated approach was used for title and abstract screening. Two reviewers independently screened full-text articles. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were completed by one reviewer and verified by another reviewer (KQ1 and 2). Quality assessments were completed by two reviewers independently in duplicate (KQ3). Disagreements were resolved through discussion. We used various risk of bias tools suitable for study design. The GRADE framework was used for rating the certainty of the evidence.
RESULTS: Ten studies evaluated the effectiveness of screening. One retrospective study reported no difference in long-term survival (approximately 6 to 12 years) between those who had a prior esophagogastroduodenoscopy and those who had not (adjusted HR 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-1.50). Though there may be higher odds of a stage 1 diagnosis than a more advanced diagnosis (stage 2-4) if an EGD had been performed in the previous 5 years (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.00-7.67). Seven studies compared different screening modalities, and showed little difference between modalities. Three studies reported on patients\' unwillingness to be screened (e.g. due to anxiety, fear of gagging). Eleven systematic reviews evaluated treatment modalities, providing some evidence of early treatment effect for some outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Little evidence exists on the effectiveness of screening and values and preferences to screening. Many treatment modalities have been evaluated, but studies are small. Overall, there is uncertainty in understanding the effectiveness of screening and early treatments.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO (CRD42017049993 [KQ1], CRD42017050014 [KQ2], CRD42018084825 [KQ3]).

The Indian Society of Gastroenterology developed this evidence-based practice guideline for management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in adults. A modified Delphi process was used to develop this consensus containing 58 statements, which were generated by electronic voting iteration as well as face-to-face meeting and review of the supporting literature primarily from India. These statements include 10 on epidemiology, 8 on clinical presentation, 10 on investigations, 23 on treatment (including medical, endoscopic, and surgical modalities), and 7 on complications of GERD. When the proportion of those who voted either to accept completely or with minor reservation was 80% or higher, the statement was regarded as accepted. The prevalence of GERD in India ranges from 7.6% to 30%, being  < 10% in most population studies, and higher in cohort studies. The dietary factors associated with GERD include use of spices and non-vegetarian food. Helicobacter pylori is thought to have a negative relation with GERD; H. pylori negative patients have higher grade of symptoms of GERD and esophagitis. Less than 10% of GERD patients in India have erosive esophagitis. In patients with occasional or mild symptoms, antacids and histamine H2 receptor blockers (H2RAs) may be used, and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) should be used in patients with frequent or severe symptoms. Prokinetics have limited proven role in management of GERD.

Barrett\'s esophagus is a condition in which metaplastic columnar epithelium replaces stratified squamous epithelium in the distal esophagus. This condition occurs due to chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease and is a risk factor for the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Multiple clinical guidelines have been published around the world in recent years to assist gastroenterologists in the management of these patients and have evolved as new data have become available. While some information such as surveillance technique has not drastically changed, there has been an evolution over the years in diagnostic criteria, screening and endoscopic therapy with a variety of subtle differences among the different guidelines. Herein, we highlight areas of agreement and disagreement on definitions, screening, surveillance, and treatment techniques among these guidelines for the optimal management of Barrett\'s esophagus patients.

The development of and adherence to quality indicators in gastroenterology, as in all of medicine, is increasing in importance to ensure that patients receive consistent high-quality care. In addition, government-based and private insurers will be expecting documentation of the parameters by which we measure quality, which will likely affect reimbursements. Barrett\'s esophagus remains a particularly important disease entity for which we should maintain up-to-date guidelines, given its commonality, potentially lethal outcomes, and controversies regarding screening and surveillance. To achieve this goal, a relatively large group of international experts was assembled and, using the modified Delphi method, evaluated the validity of multiple candidate quality indicators for the diagnosis and management of Barrett\'s esophagus. Several candidate quality indicators achieved >80% agreement. These statements are intended to serve as a consensus on candidate quality indicators for those who treat patients with Barrett\'s esophagus.