Explore the vast range of titles available.

These are updated guidelines which supersede the original version published in 2004. This work has been endorsed by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) under the auspices of the oesophageal section of the BSG. The original guidelines have undergone extensive revision by the 16 members of the Guideline Development Group with representation from individuals across all relevant disciplines, including the Heartburn Cancer UK charity, a nursing representative and a patient representative. The methodological rigour and transparency of the guideline development processes were appraised using the revised Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool.Dilatation of the oesophagus is a relatively high-risk intervention, and is required by an increasing range of disease states. Moreover, there is scarcity of evidence in the literature to guide clinicians on how to safely perform this procedure. These guidelines deal specifically with the dilatation procedure using balloon or bougie devices as a primary treatment strategy for non-malignant narrowing of the oesophagus. The use of stents is outside the remit of this paper; however, for cases of dilatation failure, alternative techniques—including stents—will be listed. The guideline is divided into the following subheadings: (1) patient preparation; (2) the dilatation procedure; (3) aftercare and (4) disease-specific considerations. A systematic literature search was performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Develop­ment and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and decide on the strength of recommendations made.

These guidelines on oesophageal manometry and gastro-oesophageal reflux monitoring supersede those produced in 2006. Since 2006 there have been significant technological advances, in particular, the development of high resolution manometry (HRM) and oesophageal impedance monitoring. The guidelines were developed by a guideline development group of patients and representatives of all the relevant professional groups using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool. A systematic literature search was performed and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tool was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and decide on the strength of the recommendations made. Key strong recommendations are made regarding the benefit of: (i) HRM over standard manometry in the investigation of dysphagia and, in particular, in characterising achalasia, (ii) adjunctive testing with larger volumes of water or solids during HRM, (iii) oesophageal manometry prior to antireflux surgery, (iv) pH/impedance monitoring in patients with reflux symptoms not responding to high dose proton pump inhibitors and (v) pH monitoring in all patients with reflux symptoms responsive to proton pump inhibitors in whom surgery is planned, but combined pH/impedance monitoring in those not responsive to proton pump inhibitors in whom surgery is planned. This work has been endorsed by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) under the auspices of the oesophageal section of the BSG.

IntroductionEndoscopic resection (ER) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have become the standard of care worldwide for treatment of early Barrett’s neoplasia. Procedural outcomes are highly dependent on the operator skill and training. Validated tools for assessment of competency in these 2 procedures are currently lacking. We aimed to develop and validate ER and RFA tools for use in clinical practice.MethodsA working group of 15 experts who met one or more of the predefined inclusion criteria was set up. Using published evidence-based criteria, the group devised a structured checklist of graded competency descriptors (scores ranged from 1=required maximal supervision to 4=competent). The latter were grouped into four main competency domains, namely: pre-procedural; specific skills; post-procedural; and endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS). Consensus agreement and piloting was undertaken to ensure content validity.Construct validity was measured by independent assessment of 60 videos per procedure of ER and RFA by 7 assessors (selected from the working group) in a random manner. Procedures were performed by 15 operators with variable expertise including experts and trainees. Statistical analysis was performed using Generalizability theory, which analysed ‘variability components’ between: operators; cases; assessors; assessors across (x) operators; and unexplained variation.ResultsData on a minimum of 45 videos per procedure were available for analysis. The mean (± standard deviation) competency scores were 3.4 (0.8) and 3.7 (0.6) for ER and RFA, respectively. The variability components for the analysis are detailed in table 1. Variation in scores between operators, assessors, and assessors across different operators was small accounting for <10% of the total variation suggesting good reliability. The majority of variance was explained by variation in cases or unexplained.Abstract P235 Table 1Variability components in assessment of construct validity of assessment tools using Generalizability theory Component ER RFA Variance Component % Variance Variance Component % Variance Operators (Vo) 1.1 x10–17 <0.1% 5.7 x10–14 <0.1% Cases (Vc:o) 0.282 45.0% 0.109 31.5% Assessors (Va) 0.052 8.3% 0.031 9.0% Assessors x operators (Vo:a) 0.055 8.7% (*) (*) Unexplained (Vca:o) 0.239 38.0% 0.206 59.5% (*) Unable to calculate due to model fitting problemsConclusionsThe DOBES assessment tools for ER and RFA appear to have good content and construct validity and were produced based on evidence and expert opinion. The analysis shows agreement on scores between expert assessors which strengthens the case for its adoption into clinical practice.

Strong recruitment and retention into randomised controlled trials involving invasive therapies is a matter of priority to ensure better achievement of trial aims. The BRIDE (Barrett's Randomised Intervention for Dysplasia by Endoscopy) Study investigated the feasibility of undertaking a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing argon plasma coagulation and radiofrequency ablation, following endoscopic resection, for the management of early Barrett's neoplasia. This paper aims to identify factors influencing patients' participation in the BRIDE Study and determine their views regarding acceptability of a potential future trial comparing surgery with endotherapy. A semistructured telephone interview study was performed, including both patients who accepted and declined to participate in the BRIDE trial. Interview data were analysed using the constant comparison approach to identify recurring themes. Interview participants were recruited from across six UK tertiary centres where the BRIDE trial was conducted. We interviewed 18 participants, including 11 participants in the BRIDE trial and 7 who declined. Four themes were identified centred around interviewees' decision to accept or decline participation in the BRIDE trial and a potential future trial comparing endotherapy with surgery: (1) influence of the recruitment process and participant-recruiter relationship; (2) participants' views of the design and aim of the study; (3) conditional altruism as a determining factor and (4) participants' perceptions of surgical risks versus less invasive treatments. We identified four main influences to optimising recruitment and retention to a randomised controlled trial comparing endotherapies in patients with early Barrett's-related neoplasia. These findings highlight the importance of qualitative research to inform the design of larger randomised controlled trials.

ObjectivesScreening in selected high risk populations for Barrett’s oesophagus (BO) and oesophageal varices (OVs) has been proposed, but there are obstacles with conventional oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (C-OGD), including patient acceptability. Portable and disposable office-based transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is a feasible and accurate alternative to C-OGD that may have use in primary and secondary care. This article outlines a qualitative analysis of patient experiences of TNE and C-OGD in order to gain an insight into an acceptable delivery of an endoscopic screening service.DesignPurposeful sampling identified 23 participants who then underwent semi-structured interviews to determine their experiences of both procedures. Thematic analysis was conducted to derive meaning from their lived experiences.SettingA secondary care endoscopy unit, clinic room and interview room.ParticipantsPatients referred for BO or OV surveillance and for endoscopy to investigate dyspepsia underwent unsedated TNE using the EG Scan II device followed by C-OGD with or without sedation (patient choice), as part of a clinical trial.ResultsThe themes that arose from our analysis were: inclusivity in one’s own healthcare, comfort level and convenience, validity of the procedure and application to a screening population and a sense of altruism and reciprocity. Positive aspects of TNE included participant empowerment, reduced discomfort and avoidance of conscious sedation. Participants felt that if TNE screening was of proven efficacy it would be welcomed, though views on use in a community setting were mixed.ConclusionsMost patients preferred TNE to unsedated C-OGD and the reasons they gave featured strongly in the emerging themes. Preferences between TNE and sedated C-OGD were more subtle, with equivalent comfort scores but merits and drawbacks of both being discussed. This information identifies opportunities and challenges in establishing an endoscopic screening service. Trial registration number ISRCTNregistry identifier: 70595405; Pre-results.

These guidelines provide a practical and evidence-based resource for the management of patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related early neoplasia. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument was followed to provide a methodological strategy for the guideline development. A systematic review of the literature was performed for English language articles published up until December 2012 in order to address controversial issues in Barrett's oesophagus including definition, screening and diagnosis, surveillance, pathological grading for dysplasia, management of dysplasia, and early cancer including training requirements. The rigour and quality of the studies was evaluated using the SIGN checklist system. Recommendations on each topic were scored by each author using a five-tier system (A+, strong agreement, to D+, strongly disagree). Statements that failed to reach substantial agreement among authors, defined as >80% agreement (A or A+), were revisited and modified until substantial agreement (>80%) was reached. In formulating these guidelines, we took into consideration benefits and risks for the population and national health system, as well as patient perspectives. For the first time, we have suggested stratification of patients according to their estimated cancer risk based on clinical and histopathological criteria. In order to improve communication between clinicians, we recommend the use of minimum datasets for reporting endoscopic and pathological findings. We advocate endoscopic therapy for high-grade dysplasia and early cancer, which should be performed in high-volume centres. We hope that these guidelines will standardise and improve management for patients with Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma represents one of the fastest rising cancers in high-income countries. Barrett's oesophagus is the premalignant precursor of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. However, only a few patients with Barrett's oesophagus develop adenocarcinoma, which complicates clinical management in the absence of valid predictors. Within an international consortium investigating the genetics of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma, we aimed to identify novel genetic risk variants for the development of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma. We did a meta-analysis of all genome-wide association studies of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma available in PubMed up to Feb 29, 2016; all patients were of European ancestry and disease was confirmed histopathologically. All participants were from four separate studies within Europe, North America, and Australia and were genotyped on high-density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays. Meta-analysis was done with a fixed-effects inverse variance-weighting approach and with a standard genome-wide significance threshold (p<5 × 10−8). We also did an association analysis after reweighting of loci with an approach that investigates annotation enrichment among genome-wide significant loci. Furthermore, the entire dataset was analysed with bioinformatics approaches—including functional annotation databases and gene-based and pathway-based methods—to identify pathophysiologically relevant cellular mechanisms. Our sample comprised 6167 patients with Barrett's oesophagus and 4112 individuals with oesophageal adenocarcinoma, in addition to 17 159 representative controls from four genome-wide association studies in Europe, North America, and Australia. We identified eight new risk loci associated with either Barrett's oesophagus or oesophageal adenocarcinoma, within or near the genes CFTR (rs17451754; p=4·8 × 10−10), MSRA (rs17749155; p=5·2 × 10−10), LINC00208 and BLK (rs10108511; p=2·1 × 10−9), KHDRBS2 (rs62423175; p=3·0 × 10−9), TPPP and CEP72 (rs9918259; p=3·2 × 10−9), TMOD1 (rs7852462; p=1·5 × 10−8), SATB2 (rs139606545; p=2·0 × 10−8), and HTR3C and ABCC5 (rs9823696; p=1·6 × 10−8). The locus identified near HTR3C and ABCC5 (rs9823696) was associated specifically with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (p=1·6 × 10−8) and was independent of Barrett's oesophagus development (p=0·45). A ninth novel risk locus was identified within the gene LPA (rs12207195; posterior probability 0·925) after reweighting with significantly enriched annotations. The strongest disease pathways identified (p<10−6) belonged to muscle cell differentiation and to mesenchyme development and differentiation. Our meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies doubled the number of known risk loci for Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma and revealed new insights into causes of these diseases. Furthermore, the specific association between oesophageal adenocarcinoma and the locus near HTR3C and ABCC5 might constitute a novel genetic marker for prediction of the transition from Barrett's oesophagus to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Fine-mapping and functional studies of new risk loci could lead to identification of key molecules in the development of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma, which might encourage development of advanced prevention and intervention strategies. US National Cancer Institute, US National Institutes of Health, National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Swedish Cancer Society, Medical Research Council UK, Cambridge NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Else Kröner Fresenius Stiftung, Wellcome Trust, Cancer Research UK, AstraZeneca UK, University Hospitals of Leicester, University of Oxford, Australian Research Council.

OSGAs only very rarely show cytological atypia but usually resemble minor salivary gland adenomas; true oesophageal adenomas show glandular dysplasia and are associated with columnar mucosa-Barrett's oesophagus in distal or 'inlet patch' in proximal oesophagus-with characteristic villous and vascular irregularity on high-resolution chromoendoscopy. The correct diagnosis of OSGA is suggested by endoscopic recognition of overlying squamous epithelium and bland non-malignant histological features of the endoscopic resection specimen, in contrast to dysplastic columnar mucosa that can form nodules under adjacent squamous epithelium.

Globus is a common functional symptom without a clearly accepted etiology. Upper esophageal sphincter (UES) hypertension and gastroesophageal reflux have been proposed but not confirmed. Kwiatek et al. report a detailed study in globus patients using high-resolution manometry (HRM). The study showed greater respiratory augmentation of UES pressure compared with control groups among two-thirds of globus patients. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings and to establish whether they are of etiologic significance.

Globus is a common functional symptom without a clearly accepted etiology. Upper esophageal sphincter (UES) hypertension and gastroesophageal reflux have been proposed but not confirmed. Kwiatek et al. report a detailed study in globus patients using high-resolution manometry (HRM). The study showed greater respiratory augmentation of UES pressure compared with control groups among two-thirds of globus patients. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings and to establish whether they are of etiologic significance.