The development and validation of an endoscopic grading system for Barrett's esophagus: the Prague C & M criteria.

BACKGROUND & AIMS Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma, its diagnosis relying initially on recognition of a columnar-lined distal esophagus. We aimed to develop and validate explicit, consensus-driven criteria for the endoscopic diagnosis and grading of BE. METHODS An international working group agreed on criteria and developed materials for their formal evaluation using video-endoscopic recordings gathered in a standardized manner in 29 patients. The criteria included assessment of the circumferential (C) and maximum (M) extent of the endoscopically visualized BE segment as well as endoscopic landmarks. The recordings were scored according to these criteria by a separate international panel of 29 endoscopists. RESULTS The Prague C & M Criteria give explicit guidance on the endoscopic recognition of BE and grading of its extent. The overall reliability coefficients (RC) for the assessment of the C & M extent of the endoscopic BE segment above the gastroesophageal junction were 0.95 and 0.94, respectively. The rates of exact agreement (for C & M values) for pairwise comparisons of individual patient values were 53% and 38%, respectively, whereas the values for agreement within a 2-cm interval were 97% and 95%, respectively. The overall RC for endoscopic recognition of BE >/=1 cm was 0.72, whereas for BE <1 cm, it was 0.22. The RCs for recognizing the location of the gastroesophageal junction and the diaphragmatic hiatus were 0.88 and 0.85, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The Prague C & M Criteria have high overall validity for the endoscopic assessment of visualized BE lengths.

[1]  S. Spechler,et al.  Clinical practice. Barrett's Esophagus. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  A. Sonnenberg,et al.  Hiatal hernia size, Barrett's length, and severity of acid reflux are all risk factors for esophageal adenocarcinoma , 2002, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[3]  R. Cestari,et al.  Long-term endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett's esophagus. incidence of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma: a prospective study , 2003, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[4]  R. Sampliner,et al.  Diagnostic inconsistencies in Barrett's esophagus , 1994 .

[5]  J. Hardcastle,et al.  Length of Barrett's oesophagus: an important factor in the development of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma. , 1992, Gut.

[6]  David F. Cruess,et al.  Barrett's esophagus: A prevalent, occult complication of gastroesophageal reflux disease , 1987 .

[7]  E. Kuipers,et al.  Endoscopic regression of Barrett’s oesophagus during omeprazole treatment; a randomised double blind study , 1999, Gut.

[8]  Janusz Jankowski,et al.  A critical review of the diagnosis and management of Barrett's esophagus: the AGA Chicago Workshop. , 2004, Gastroenterology.

[9]  R. Sampliner,et al.  Progression or regression of barrett's esophagus—is it all in the eye of the beholder? , 2003, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[10]  W. Hop,et al.  Risk factors for the development of an adenocarcinoma in columnar‐lined (Barrett) esophagus , 1993, Cancer.

[11]  V. Sharma,et al.  Changing trends in esophageal cancer: a 15-year experience in a single center , 1998 .

[12]  M. Aickin,et al.  Lack of impact of therapy on extent of Barrett's esophagus in 67 patients , 2005, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.

[13]  M F Tsai,et al.  Barrett's esophagus in patients with symptomatic reflux esophagitis. , 1989, The American journal of gastroenterology.

[14]  R. Sandler,et al.  Is there publication bias in the reporting of cancer risk in Barrett's esophagus? , 2000, Gastroenterology.

[15]  R. Sampliner,et al.  Short segment Barrett's esophagus—the need for standardization of the definition and of endoscopic criteria , 1998, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[16]  K. Mafune,et al.  Is there a set of histologic changes that are invariably reflux associated? , 2005, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[17]  S. McClave,et al.  Early diagnosis of columnar-lined esophagus: a new endoscopic diagnostic criterion. , 1987, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[18]  R. R. Smith,et al.  The relationship between columnar epithelial dysplasia and invasive adenocarcinoma arising in Barrett's esophagus. , 1987, American journal of clinical pathology.

[19]  D. Armstrong Review article: towards consistency in the endoscopic diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus and columnar metaplasia , 2004, Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics.

[20]  Wilkinson,et al.  Regression of columnar‐lined (Barrett’s) oesophagus with omeprazole 40 mg daily: results of 5 years of continuous therapy , 1999, Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics.

[21]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[22]  M. Mayo,et al.  Yield of Intestinal Metaplasia in Patients with Suspected Short-Segment Barrett's Esophagus (SSBE) on Repeat Endoscopy , 2002, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.

[23]  A. Shar,et al.  Quantitative endoscopy: precise computerized measurement of metaplastic epithelial surface area in Barrett's esophagus. , 1995, Gastroenterology.

[24]  A. Fendrick,et al.  Screening and Surveillance for Barrett Esophagus in High-Risk Groups: A CostUtility Analysis , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[25]  D. Faigel,et al.  Risk Factors for Dysplasia in Patients with Barrett's Esophagus (BE): Results from a Multicenter Consortium , 2003, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.