z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Outcomes of Radiofrequency Ablation versus Endoscopic Surveillance for Barrett’s Esophagus with Low-Grade Dysplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Author(s) -
Jagpal S. Klair,
Yousaf Zafar,
Navroop Nagra,
Arvind R. Murali,
Mahendran Jayaraj,
Dhruv P. Singh,
Tarun Rustagi,
Rajesh Krishnamoorthi
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
digestive diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.879
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1421-9875
pISSN - 0257-2753
DOI - 10.1159/000514786
Subject(s) - medicine , barrett's esophagus , dysplasia , radiofrequency ablation , meta analysis , esophagus , confidence interval , gastroenterology , intestinal metaplasia , endoscopic mucosal resection , endoscopy , adenocarcinoma , ablation , cancer
Background: Endoscopic therapy using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a recommended treatment for Barrett’s esophagus with high-grade dysplasia (BE-HGD) without a visible lesion which is managed by resection. However, currently, there is no consensus on the management of BE with low-grade dysplasia (BE-LGD) – RFA versus endoscopic surveillance. Hence, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of these comparative studies to compare the risk of progression to HGD or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) among patients with BE-LGD treated with RFA versus endoscopic surveillance. Methods: The primary outcome was to compare the risk of progression to HGD or EAC among patients with BE-LGD treated with RFA versus endoscopic surveillance. Results: Four comparative studies reporting a total of 543 patients with BE-LGD were included in the meta-analysis (234 in RFA and 309 in endoscopic surveillance). The progression of BE-LGD to either HGD or EAC was significantly lower in patients treated with RFA compared to endoscopic surveillance (OR: 0.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04–0.65, p = 0.01). The progression to HGD alone was significantly lower in patients treated with RFA versus endoscopic surveillance (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.08–0.61, p = 0.003). The progression to EAC alone was numerically lower in RFA than endoscopic surveillance without statistical significance (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.17–1.16, p = 0.09). Moderate heterogeneity was noted in the analysis. Conclusions: Based on our meta-analysis, there was a significant reduction in the risk of progression to HGD or EAC among patients with BE-LGD treated with RFA compared with those undergoing endoscopic surveillance. Endoscopic eradication therapy with RFA should be the preferred management approach for BE-LGD.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom