Mucosal morphology in Barrett’s esophagus: interobserver agreement and role of narrow band imaging

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Background and study aims: We have recently proposed a classification of mucosal morphology in Barrett’s esophagus based on three criteria: regularity of mucosal pattern, regularity of vascular pattern, and presence of abnormal blood vessels. We aimed to evaluate the interobserver agreement with the proposed mucosal morphology classification and to assess the additional value of narrow band imaging (NBI) over high resolution white light endoscopy (HR-WLE).

Patients and methods: Five international experts in the field of Barrett’s imaging and seven community endoscopists with no expertise in this field independently evaluated magnified still images from 50 areas, obtained with HR-WLE and NBI, in Barrett’s esophagus patients. Visual analogue scales (VAS) were used for scoring imaging quality. Interobserver agreement for mucosal morphology and yield for identifying early neoplasia were assessed.

Results: Imaging qualities of NBI were rated more highly than HR-WLE, when evaluated separately as well as in a side-by-side comparison. The interobserver agreement ranged from 0.40 to 0.56 and did not significantly differ between expert and non-expert endoscopists. The overall yield for correctly identifying images of early neoplasia was 81 % for HR-WLE, 72 % for NBI and 83 % for HR-WLE + NBI, with no significant difference between experts and non-experts.

Conclusion: Interobserver agreement for the classification of mucosal morphology was moderate. Although NBI was rated more highly than HR-WLE for imaging quality, this did not result in improved interobserver agreement or increased yield for identifying early neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. This applied to non-expert as well as expert endoscopists.

References

• 1 Devesa S S, Blot W J, Fraumeni Jr J F. Changing patterns in the incidence of esophageal and gastric carcinoma in the United States.  Cancer. 1998;  83 2049-2053
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Sampliner R E. Updated guidelines for the diagnosis, surveillance, and therapy of Barrett’s esophagus.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 1888-1895
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Hirota W K, Zuckerman M J, Adler D G. et al . ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in the surveillance of premalignant conditions of the upper GI tract.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  63 570-580
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Sharma P, Weston A P, Topalovski M. et al . Magnification chromoendoscopy for the detection of intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus.  Gut. 2003;  52 24-27
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Guelrud M, Ehrlich E E. Endoscopic classification of Barrett’s esophagus.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  59 58-65
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Endo T, Awakawa T, Takahashi H. et al . Classification of Barrett’s epithelium by magnifying endoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;  55 641-647
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Meining A, Rosch T, Kiesslich R. et al . Inter- and intra-observer variability of magnification chromoendoscopy for detecting specialized intestinal metaplasia at the gastroesophageal junction.  Endoscopy. 2004;  36 160-164
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Gono K, Obi T, Yamaguchi M. et al . Appearance of enhanced tissue features in narrow-band endoscopic imaging.  J Biomed Opt. 2004;  9 568-577
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Kara M A, Ennahachi M, Fockens P. et al . Detection and classification of the mucosal and vascular patterns (mucosal morphology) in Barrett’s esophagus by using narrow band imaging.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  64 155-166
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Dixon M F. Gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia: Vienna revisited.  Gut. 2002;  51 130-131
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Curvers W L, Singh R, Song L M. et al . Endoscopic tri-modal imaging for detection of early neoplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus: a multi-centre feasibility study using high-resolution endoscopy, autofluorescence imaging and narrow band imaging incorporated in one endoscopy system.  Gut. 2008;  57 167-172
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Anagnostopoulos G K, Yao K, Kaye P. et al . Magnification endoscopy with narrow band imaging in Barrett’s esophagus.  J Clin Gastroenterol. 2006;  40 (Suppl. 4) S192-S193
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Anagnostopoulos G K, Yao K, Kaye P. et al . Novel endoscopic observation in Barrett’s oesophagus using high resolution magnification endoscopy and narrow band imaging.  Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;  26 501-507
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Ragunath K, Krasner N, Raman V S. et al . A randomized, prospective cross-over trial comparing methylene blue-directed biopsy and conventional random biopsy for detecting intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus.  Endoscopy. 2003;  35 998-1003
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Yao K, Takaki Y, Ohara J. et al . Magnification endoscopy outlines the microvascular architecture and extent of Barrett’s intramucosal carcinoma prior to endoscopic resection.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  63 1064-1065
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Singh R, Owen V, Karageorgiou H. et al . Narrow band imaging with magnification is superior to white light endoscopy with magnification in studying the mucosal morphology in Barrett’s oesophagus [abstract].  Gut. 2008;  57 Suppl 1 A14-A15
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Wallace M B, Perelman L T, Backman V. et al . Endoscopic detection of dysplasia in patients with Barrett’s esophagus using light-scattering spectroscopy.  Gastroenterology. 2000;  119 677-682
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Wolfsen H C, Hemminger L L, Wallace M B. Detection of residual Barrett’s mucosa after photodynamic therapy (PDT) using high definition narrow band imaging [abstract].  Gastroenterology. 2006;  130 A310
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Wong Kee Song L M, Wilson B C. Endoscopic detection of early upper GI cancers.  Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2005;  19 833-856
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Ferguson D D, DeVault K R, Krishna M. et al . Enhanced magnification-directed biopsies do not increase the detection of intestinal metaplasia in patients with GERD.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;  101 1611-1616
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Savoy A D, Wolfsen H C, Raimondo M. et al . The role of surveillance endoscopy and endosonography after endoscopic ablation of high-grade dysplasia and carcinoma of the esophagus.  Dis Esophagus. 2008;  21 108-113
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Wolfsen H C, Crook J E, Krishna M. et al . Prospective, controlled tandem endoscopy study of narrow band imaging for dysplasia detection in Barrett’s esophagus.  Gastroenterology. 2008;  135 32-40
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Landis J R, Koch G G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.  Biometrics. 1977;  33 159-174
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Curvers W, Baak L, Kiesslich R. et al . Chromoendoscopy and narrow-band imaging compared with high-resolution magnification endoscopy in Barrett’s esophagus.  Gastroenterology. 2008;  134 670-679
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Sumiyama K, Kaise M, Nakayoshi T. et al . Combined use of a magnifying endoscope with a narrow band imaging system and a multibending endoscope for en bloc EMR of early stage gastric cancer.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  60 79-84
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

J. BergmanMD, PhD 

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Academic Medical Center

Meibergdreef 9
1105 AZ, Amsterdam
The Netherlands

Fax: +31-20-6917033

Email: j.j.bergman@amc.uva.nl