Accuracy of probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) compared to random biopsies during endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus

Abstract Background For surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus (BE), the current standard of random 4-quadrant biopsies misses 10 – 50 % of esophageal neoplasms, and does not permit real-time decision-making. Probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) permits real-time in vivo histologic assessment of esophageal mucosa during upper endoscopy. Prospective studies comparing the accuracy of pCLE to 4-quadrant biopsies in routine clinical practice are lacking. Methods Consecutive patients with BE underwent high definition white light and narrow-band imaging followed by pCLE and targeted biopsy or mucosal resection. Four-quadrant biopsies were obtained during the same session. Baseline variables, real-time pCLE interpretation, and histology results were prospectively recorded. Blinded expert review of pCLE sequences and histology specimens was performed. A sample size of 64 patients was calculated a priori based on 3 % estimated prevalence of high grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer. Results In total, 66 patients were included in the study. The prevalence of HGD or cancer was 4.55 %. Both real-time and blinded pCLE correctly identified all cases of cancer. For the primary outcome, real-time pCLE was 98 % specific but only 67 % sensitive for HGD/cancer compared to non-blinded pathologist interpretation. For HGD and cancer, inter-observer agreement was substantial between real-time and blinded endomicroscopists (kappa = 0.6). pCLE identified dysplasia in 75 % of cases where both blinded and unblinded pathology interpretation was low grade dysplasia. Conclusions pCLE demonstrates high specificity for detecting dysplasia and cancer, but lower sensitivity may limit its utility in routine BE surveillance. pCLE may have a role in confirming LGD in real-time before eradication therapy.

[1]  M. Vieth,et al.  Diagnosis and Management of Low-Grade Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus: Expert Review From the Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association. , 2016, Gastroenterology.

[2]  Nicholas J Shaheen,et al.  ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Barrett’s Esophagus , 2016, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[3]  David Lieberman,et al.  White Paper AGA: Advanced Imaging in Barrett's Esophagus. , 2015, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[4]  M. O’Donovan,et al.  Autofluorescence-Directed Confocal Endomicroscopy in Combination With a Three-Biomarker Panel Can Inform Management Decisions in Barrett’s Esophagus , 2015, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[5]  V. Konda,et al.  Confocal laser endomicroscopy. , 2014, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[6]  Siddharth Singh,et al.  Incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2014, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[7]  Sharmila Anandasabapathy,et al.  In vivo endomicroscopy improves detection of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia: a multicenter international randomized controlled trial (with video). , 2014, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[8]  Kenneth K Wang,et al.  The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on imaging in Barrett's Esophagus. , 2012, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[9]  Michael Vieth,et al.  Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy , 2012, Gastroenterology research and practice.

[10]  Michael B Wallace,et al.  Real-time increased detection of neoplastic tissue in Barrett's esophagus with probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy: final results of an international multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. , 2011, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[11]  M. Wallace,et al.  Miami classification for probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy , 2011, Endoscopy.

[12]  Prateek Sharma,et al.  American Gastroenterological Association technical review on the management of Barrett's esophagus. , 2011, Gastroenterology.

[13]  M. Vieth,et al.  Probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy compared with standard four-quadrant biopsy for evaluation of neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus , 2010, Endoscopy.

[14]  A. Neugut,et al.  Adherence to biopsy guidelines for Barrett's esophagus surveillance in the community setting in the United States. , 2009, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[15]  Revital Kariv,et al.  The Seattle protocol does not more reliably predict the detection of cancer at the time of esophagectomy than a less intensive surveillance protocol. , 2009, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[16]  L. Murray,et al.  The incidence of esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2008, American journal of epidemiology.

[17]  R. Odze,et al.  Diagnosis and grading of dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus , 2006, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[18]  P. Fockens,et al.  Detection and classification of the mucosal and vascular patterns (mucosal morphology) in Barrett's esophagus by using narrow band imaging. , 2006, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[19]  J. Goldblum,et al.  Jumbo biopsy forceps protocol still misses unsuspected cancer in Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia. , 1999, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

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

[21]  Cadman L. Leggett,et al.  Application of confocal laser endomicroscopy in the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus , 2014, Annals of gastroenterology.

[22]  A. Rastogi,et al.  What's Hot in the Red Journal This Month , 2011, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.