Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundWe previously developed a Japan Esophageal Society Barrett’s Esophagus (JES-BE) magnifying endoscopic classification for superficial BE-related neoplasms (BERN) and validated it in a nationwide multicenter study that followed a diagnostic flow chart based on mucosal and vascular patterns (MP, VP) with nine diagnostic criteria. Our present post hoc analysis aims to further simplify the diagnostic criteria for superficial BERN.MethodsWe used data from our previous study, including 10 reviewers’ assessments for 156 images of high-magnifying narrow-band imaging (HM-NBI) (67 dysplastic and 89 non-dysplastic histology). We statistically analyzed the diagnostic performance of each diagnostic criterion of MP (form, size, arrangement, density, and white zone), VP (form, caliber change, location, and greenish thick vessels [GTV]), and all their combinations to achieve a simpler diagnostic algorithm to detect superficial BERN.ResultsDiagnostic accuracy values based on the MP of each single criterion or combined criteria showed a marked trend of being higher than those based on VP. In reviewers’ assessments of visible MPs, the combination of irregularity for form, size, or white zone had the highest diagnostic performance, with a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 91% for dysplastic histology; in the assessments of invisible MPs, GTV had the highest diagnostic performance among the VP of each single criterion and all combinations of two or more criteria (sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 92%).ConclusionThe present post hoc analysis suggests the feasibility of further simplifying the diagnostic algorithm of the JES-BE classification. Further studies in a practical setting are required to validate these results.

Background Currently, no classification system using magnification endoscopy for the diagnosis of superficial Barrett’s esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia has been widely accepted. This nationwide multicenter study aimed to validate the diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of the magnification endoscopy classification system, including the diagnostic flowchart developed by the Japan Esophageal Society—Barrett’s esophagus working group (JES-BE) for superficial Barrett’s esophagus-related neoplasms. Methods The JES-BE acquired high-definition magnification narrow-band imaging (HM-NBI) images of non-dysplastic and dysplastic BE from 10 domestic institutions. A total of 186 high-quality HM-NBI images were selected. Thirty images were used for the training phase and 156 for the validation (test) phase. We invited five non-experts and five expert reviewers. In the training phase, the reviewers discussed how to correctly predict the histology based on the JES-BE criteria. In the validation phase, they evaluated whether the criteria accurately predicted the histology results according to the diagnostic flowchart. The validation phase was performed immediately after the training phase and at 6 weeks thereafter. Results The sensitivity and specificity for all reviewers were 87% and 97%, respectively. Overall accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 91%, 98%, and 83%, respectively. The overall strength of inter-observer and intra-observer agreements for dysplastic histology prediction was κ  = 0.77 and κ  = 0.83, respectively. No significant difference in diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility between experts and non-experts was found. Conclusion The JES-BE classification system, including the diagnostic flowchart for predicting dysplastic BE, is acceptable and reliable, regardless of the clinician’s experience level.

Aim and methods The Japan Esophageal Society created a working committee group consisting of 11 expert endoscopists and 2 pathologists with expertise in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma. The group developed a consensus-based classification for the diagnosis of superficial BE-related neoplasms using magnifying endoscopy. Results The classification has three characteristics: simplified, an easily understood classification by incorporating the diagnostic criteria for the early gastric cancer, including the white zone and demarcation line, and the presence of a modified flat pattern corresponding to non-dysplastic histology by adding novel diagnostic criteria. Magnifying endoscopic findings are composed of mucosal and vascular patterns, and are initially classified as “visible” or “invisible.” Morphologic features were evaluated for “visible” patterns, and were subsequently rated as “regular” or “irregular,” and the histology, non-dysplastic or dysplastic, was predicted. Conclusion We introduce the process and outline of the magnifying endoscopic classification.

Saliva is a neurally induced solution with buffering capacity against acidic solutions. Salivation therefore plays an important role in defending the esophageal mucosa against refluxed gastric acid and is evoked by cholinergic stimulation. Both nizatidine and cisapride are reported to increase acetylcholine concentrations in the postganglionic cholinergic synapses. We performed this study to clarify the effect of administration of nizatidine and cisapride on salivary secretion. Eight-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats were used for the experiments. Histamine-stimulated gastric acid secretion was measured after intraduodenal administration of nizatidine or famotidine to determine the equipotent acid-suppressing doses. Salivary secretion was then measured for 3 hr after intraduodenal administration of nizatidine (30 mg/kg), famotidine (3 mg/kg), or cisapride (1 mg/kg). Both nizatidine and famotidine dose-dependently inhibited histamine-stimulated gastric acid secretion. Total salivary secretion was significantly increased by nizatidine (P = 0.02) and cisapride (P = 0.02) but not by famotidine (P = 0.50) compared with controls.

Background Acid suppression induced by rabeprazole 5 mg in patients with NERD has not been reported in the literature. Aims The objective of this study was to investigate gastroesophageal acid suppression in NERD patients by rabeprazole 5 mg and 10 mg/day. Methods Subjects were grade M (minimal changes) NERD patients. Twenty-two patients not responding to open label antacid therapy entered a double-blind treatment phase in which rabeprazole 5 mg or 10 mg/day for four weeks were compared. Twenty-four-hour esophageal pH monitoring was performed before and on treatment (at week 4) to assess the pharmacodynamic effect of these doses of rabeprazole. Results The frequency of heartburn episodes and the number of acid reflux episodes in the esophagus corresponded well in grade M NERD patients ( r  = 0.44, P  = 0.042). Median percentage of time at pH < 4 was 4.3% before treatment and 1.1% on treatment with rabeprazole 5 mg (change from baseline; −2.5%), whereas the median percentage of time at pH < 4 in the rabeprazole 10 mg group was 7.4% before treatment and 0.5% on treatment (change from baseline; −6.6%). Likewise, treatment-related changes of median number of reflux episodes were −18.0 with rabeprazole 5 mg and −44.0 with rabeprazole 10 mg. For each esophageal pH data, no significant differences were observed between the two groups ( P  = 0.377, P  = 0.077). Conclusions Administration of 5 mg and 10 mg rabeprazole sufficiently inhibited pathological gastroesophageal acid reflux and relieved heartburn episodes in NERD patients who did not respond to an antacid. Further investigation would be necessary to determine proper usage of the two doses.