You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 69, Issue 5
  • Do subjects with mild or moderate atrophic gastritis or intestinal metaplasia confined to the antrum benefit from gastric cancer surveillance?

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Do subjects with mild or moderate atrophic gastritis or intestinal metaplasia confined to the antrum benefit from gastric cancer surveillance?
  1. Duc Trong Quach1,
  2. Toru Hiyama2,
  3. Takuji Gotoda3
  1. 1 Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
  2. 2 Health Service Center, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima, Japan
  3. 3 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
  1. Correspondence to Professor Duc Trong Quach, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam; drquachtd{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-318720

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We read with interest the paper by Rugge et al which reported that Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment (OLGA) staging reliably predicted the risk for development of gastric epithelial neoplasia.1 No neoplastic lesions were found in low-risk OLGA stages (ie, stages 0–II) where they developed exclusively in high-risk stages (ie, stages III–IV) when followed for 55 months. This study also showed that Helicobacter pylori eradication in subjects with high-risk OLGA stages did not abolish the risk for neoplastic progression. These results are quite convincing. However, two concerns would be raised.

    First, whether endoscopy surveillance …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors DTQ initiated the study conception and wrote the initial draft. TH and TG contributed to literature review and critically revised the draft. All authors approved the final version of the draft. DTQ submitted the study.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.