Endoscopists systematically undersample patients with long-segment Barrett’s esophagus: an analysis of biopsy sampling practices from a quality improvement registry - 18/10/19
Abstract |
Background and Aims |
Guidelines recommend systematic biopsy sampling in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) to reduce sampling error. Adherence to this biopsy sampling protocol has been suggested as a quality indicator; however, estimates of adherence are not available. Using a national registry, we assessed adherence and identified predictors of adherence to biopsy sampling protocols.
Methods |
We analyzed data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium Registry that included procedure indication, demographics, endoscopy, and pathology results. Patients with an indication of BE screening/surveillance or an endoscopic finding of BE were included. Adherence to the Seattle protocol was assessed by dividing BE length by number of pathology jars, with a ratio ≤2.0 with rounding down (lenient definition) or rounding up (stringent definition) for odd BE lengths considered adherent. Variables associated with adherence were assessed using generalized estimating equations to control for clustering within individual physicians.
Results |
Of 786,712 EGDs assessed, 58,709 (7.5%) EGDs in 53,541 patients met inclusion criteria (mean age, 61.3 years; 60.4% men; 90.2% white; mean BE length, 2.3 cm). When the lenient and stringent definitions for adherence were used, 87.8% and 82.7% of EGDs were adherent, respectively. Increasing BE length was the most significant predictor of nonadherence (odds ratio, .69; 95% confidence interval, .67-.71). Other predictors were increasing age, male gender, increasing American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and practice location. Performance of EGD by nongastroenterologist physicians was associated with nonadherence (odds ratio, .07; 95% confidence interval, .06-.10).
Conclusions |
Nearly 20% of endoscopies performed in BE patients were not adherent to the Seattle protocol. As BE length increases, endoscopists become less compliant with odds of nonadherence increasing by 31% with every 1-cm increase in length.
Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.Abbreviations : ASA, BE, CI, EAC, GIQuIC, HGD, LGD
Mappa
| DISCLOSURE: The following author received research support for this study from the University of Colorado Department of Medicine Outstanding Early Scholars Program: S. Wani. In addition, the following authors disclosed financial relationships relevant to this publication: S. Wani, S. Komanduri, V. R. Muthusamy: Consultant for Boston Scientific and Medtronic. N. J. Shaheen: Research grants from CDx Medical, Medtronic, C2 Therapeutics, CSA Medical, and Interspace Diagnostics; consultant for Shire and Boston Scientific. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication. |
|
| See CME section; p. 846. |
|
| If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Dr Wani at sachinwani10@yahoo.com. |
Vol 90 - N° 5
P. 732 - novembre 2019 Ritorno al numeroBenvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.
Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?
