Expert assessment on volumetric laser endomicroscopy full scans in Barrett’s esophagus patients with or without high grade dysplasia or early cancer

Abstract

Background Volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE) allows for near-microscopic imaging of the superficial esophageal wall and may improve detection of early neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus (BE). Interpretation of a 6-cm long, circumferential VLE “full scan” may however be challenging for endoscopists. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of VLE experts in correctly diagnosing VLE full scans of early neoplasia and non-dysplastic BE (NDBE).

Methods 29 VLE full scan videos (15 neoplastic and 14 NDBE) were randomly evaluated by 12 VLE experts using a web-based module. Experts were blinded to the endoscopic BE images and histology. The 15 neoplastic cases contained a subtle endoscopically visible lesion, which on endoscopic resection showed high grade dysplasia or cancer. NDBE cases had no visible lesions and an absence of dysplasia in all biopsies. VLE videos were first scored as “neoplastic” or “NDBE.” If neoplastic, assessors located the area most suspicious for neoplasia. Primary outcome was the performance of VLE experts in differentiating between non-dysplastic and neoplastic full scan videos, calculated by accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Secondary outcomes included correct location of neoplasia, interobserver agreement, and level of confidence.

Results VLE experts correctly labelled 73 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 67 % – 79 %) of neoplastic VLE videos. In 54 % (range 27 % – 66 %) both neoplastic diagnosis and lesion location were correct. NDBE videos were consistent with endoscopic biopsies in 52 % (95 %CI 46 % – 57 %). Interobserver agreement was fair (kappa 0.28). High level of confidence was associated with a higher rate of correct neoplastic diagnosis (81 %) and lesion location (73 %).

Conclusions Identification of subtle neoplastic lesions in VLE full scans by experts was disappointing. Future studies should focus on improving methodologies for reviewing full scans, development of refined VLE criteria for neoplasia, and computer-aided diagnosis of VLE scans.

^* Equal first authors

Publication History

Received: 14 February 2020

Accepted: 04 June 2020

Accepted Manuscript online:
04 June 2020

Article published online:
17 June 2020

• References

• 1 Shaheen NJ, Falk GW, Iyer PG. et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 30-50
• 2 Belghazi K, Bergman J, Pouw RE. Endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation for early esophageal neoplasia. Dig Dis 2016; 34: 469-475
• 3 Gordon LG, Mayne GC, Hirst NG. et al. Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance of non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 242-256.e6
• 4 Tschanz ER. Do 40% of patients resected for Barrett esophagus with high-grade dysplasia have unsuspected adenocarcinoma?. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005; 129: 177-180
• 5 Leggett CL, Gorospe EC, Chan DK. et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of volumetric laser endomicroscopy and confocal laser endomicroscopy in the detection of dysplasia associated with Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 880-888.e2
• 6 Evans JA, Poneros JM, Bouma BE. et al. Optical coherence tomography to identify intramucosal carcinoma and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4: 38-43
• 7 Swager AF, Tearney GJ, Leggett CL. et al. Identification of volumetric laser endomicroscopy features predictive for early neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus using high-quality histological correlation. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 918-926.e7
• 8 Trindade AJ, Inamdar S, Smith MS. et al. Volumetric laser endomicroscopy in Barrett’s esophagus: interobserver agreement for interpretation of Barrett’s esophagus and associated neoplasia among high-frequency users. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 133-139
• 9 Alshelleh M, Inamdar S, McKinley M. et al. Incremental yield of dysplasia detection in Barrett’s esophagus using volumetric laser endomicroscopy with and without laser marking compared with a standardized random biopsy protocol. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 88: 35-42
• 10 Smith MS, Cash B, Konda V. et al. Volumetric laser endomicroscopy and its application to Barrett’s esophagus: results from a 1,000 patient registry. Dis Esophagus 2019; 32: 1-8
• 11 Alvarez HerreroL, Curvers WL, van Vilsteren FGI. et al. Validation of the Prague C&M classification of Barrett’s esophagus in clinical practice. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 876-882
• 12 Pouw RE, van Vilsteren FGI, Peters FP. et al. Randomized trial on endoscopic resection-cap versus multiband mucosectomy for piecemeal endoscopic resection of early Barrett’s neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 35-43
• 13 Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971; 76: 378-382
• 14 Hedeker D, du Toit SHC, Demirtas H. et al. A note on marginalization of regression parameters from mixed models of binary outcomes. Biometrics 2018; 74: 354-361
• 15 Trindade AJ, McKinley MJ, Fan C. et al. Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus using volumetric laser endomicroscopy with artificial intelligence image enhancement. Gastroenterology 2019; 157: 303-305