Table 3

Technologies investigated for screening in Barrett's oesophagus and OAC

StudyYearTechniqueNo of patientsDesignFindingsGrade
Gerson et al3612009Standard OGD126 asymptomatic womenProspective single-centre screening6% Barrett's prevalence (all SSBO)III
Rex et al3622003Standard OGD961 patients undergoing colonoscopyProspective multicentre screening6.8% Barrett's prevalence (8.3% in symptomatic individuals)III
Jobe et al3632006Standard OGD vs TNE121 with GORD or known Barrett'sRandomised crossoverSimilar prevalence of Barrett's with the two techniquesIb
Shariff et al132012Standard OGD vs TNE82 (49 with known Barrett's+33 controls)Randomised crossoverTNE had 98% sens and 100% spec for diagnosis of Barrett'sIb
Lin et al3642007CE followed by OGD90 with GORD or known Barrett'sProspective blinded comparativeCE had 67% sens and 84% spec for diagnosis of Barrett'sIII
Galmiche et al3652008CE followed by OGD77 referred for OGDProspective blinded comparativeCE had 60% sens and 100% spec for diagnosis of Barrett'sIII
Ramirez et al3662008String CE followed by OGD100 with GORDProspective blinded comparativeCE had 73% sens and 84% spec for diagnosis of Barrett'sIII
Kadri et al3672010Cytosponge followed by OGD501 with GORDProspective blinded comparativeCE had 73% sens and 94% spec for diagnosis of Barrett's (≥1 cm)III
Qin et al3681993Occult blood bead233 825 individualsProspective cohortSensitivity for upper GI cancer: 3.4%III
  • CE, capsule endoscopy; OAC, oesophageal adenocarcinoma; sens, sensitivity; spec, specificity; SSBO, short segment of Barrett's; TNE, transnasal endoscopy.