TableĀ 7

Comparative studies between standard and advanced imaging techniques for the diagnosis of IM and dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

StudyYearTechniqueStudy designNo of patientsIncreased detection of IMIncreased detection of dysplasiaGrade of evidence
Sharma et al1452001MBCohort158p=0.024N/AIIb
Canto et al1472000MBRandomised MB vs WLE43p=0.0001p=0.03Ib
Ragunath et al1502003MBRandomised cross-over57p=0.032p=nsIb
Wo et al1512001MBRandomised cross-over47p=nsp=nsIb
Horwhat et al1492008MBRandomised cross-over48p=nsp=nsIb
Gossner et al1462006MBCohort cross-over86N/Ap=0.053IIa
Lim et al1482006MBRandomised cross-over30N/Ap=0.02*Ib
Ngamruengphong et al1522009MBMeta-analysis450p=nsp=nsIa
Kara et al1392005IC/NBIRandomised cross-over28N/Ap=nsIb
Hoffman et al1562006AARandomised cross-over31p<0.001N/AIb
Ferguson et al1572006AARandomised137p=nsN/AIb
Longcroft-Wheaton et al1602010AARetrospective cohort190N/Ap=0.001III
Wolfsen et al1652008NBICohort tandem65N/Ap<0.001IIa
Sharma et al1662013NBIRandomised cross-over123N/Ap=nsIb
Curvers et al1742010ETMIRandomised cross-over87N/Ap=nsIb
Curvers et al1752011ETMIRandomised cross-over99N/Ap=nsIb
  • *Higher yield of dysplasia in WLE with random biopsies compared with MB chromoendoscopy.

  • AA, acetic acid; ETMI, endoscopic trimodal imaging; IC, indigo carmine; IM, intestinal metaplasia; MB, methylene blue; NBI, narrow band imaging; WLE, white light endoscopy.