Cargando…

Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis

Background and study aims  According to a recent guideline, patients with gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) should have at least five biopsies performed under the Sydney protocol to evaluate for risk of extensive GIM. However, only narrow-band imaging (NBI)-targeted biopsy may be adequate to diagn...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Faknak, Natee, Pittayanon, Rapat, Tiankanon, Kasenee, Lerttanatum, Nathawadee, Sanpavat, Anapat, Klaikaew, Naruemon, Rerknimitr, Rungsun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9010080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35433197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1783-9081
_version_ 1784687406575779840
author Faknak, Natee
Pittayanon, Rapat
Tiankanon, Kasenee
Lerttanatum, Nathawadee
Sanpavat, Anapat
Klaikaew, Naruemon
Rerknimitr, Rungsun
author_facet Faknak, Natee
Pittayanon, Rapat
Tiankanon, Kasenee
Lerttanatum, Nathawadee
Sanpavat, Anapat
Klaikaew, Naruemon
Rerknimitr, Rungsun
author_sort Faknak, Natee
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims  According to a recent guideline, patients with gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) should have at least five biopsies performed under the Sydney protocol to evaluate for risk of extensive GIM. However, only narrow-band imaging (NBI)-targeted biopsy may be adequate to diagnose extensive GIM. Patients and methods  A cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2019 and October 2020. Patients with histology-proven GIM were enrolled. All patients underwent standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed by a gastroenterology trainee. The performing endoscopists took biopsies from either a suspected GIM area (NBI-targeted biopsy) or randomly (if negative for GIM read by NBI) to complete five areas of the stomach as per the Sydney protocol. The gold standard for GIM diagnosis was pathology read by two gastrointestinal pathologists with unanimous agreement. Results  A total of 95 patients with GIM were enrolled and 50 (52.6%) were men with a mean age of 64 years. Extensive GIM was diagnosed in 43 patients (45.3%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of NBI-targeted biopsy vs. the Sydney protocol were 88.4% vs.100 %, 90.3% vs. 90.3%, 88.4% vs. 89.6%, 90.3% vs. 100%, and 89.5% vs. 94.7%, respectively. The number of specimens from NBI-targeted biopsy was significantly lower than that from Sydney protocol (311vs.475, P  < 0.001). Conclusions  Both NBI-targeted biopsy and Sydney protocol by a gastroenterologist who was not an expert in NBI and who has experience with diagnosis of at least 60 cases of GIM provided an NPV higher than 90%. Thus, targeted biopsy alone with NBI, which requires fewer specimens, is an alternative option for extensive GIM diagnosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9010080
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90100802022-04-15 Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis Faknak, Natee Pittayanon, Rapat Tiankanon, Kasenee Lerttanatum, Nathawadee Sanpavat, Anapat Klaikaew, Naruemon Rerknimitr, Rungsun Endosc Int Open Background and study aims  According to a recent guideline, patients with gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) should have at least five biopsies performed under the Sydney protocol to evaluate for risk of extensive GIM. However, only narrow-band imaging (NBI)-targeted biopsy may be adequate to diagnose extensive GIM. Patients and methods  A cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2019 and October 2020. Patients with histology-proven GIM were enrolled. All patients underwent standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed by a gastroenterology trainee. The performing endoscopists took biopsies from either a suspected GIM area (NBI-targeted biopsy) or randomly (if negative for GIM read by NBI) to complete five areas of the stomach as per the Sydney protocol. The gold standard for GIM diagnosis was pathology read by two gastrointestinal pathologists with unanimous agreement. Results  A total of 95 patients with GIM were enrolled and 50 (52.6%) were men with a mean age of 64 years. Extensive GIM was diagnosed in 43 patients (45.3%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of NBI-targeted biopsy vs. the Sydney protocol were 88.4% vs.100 %, 90.3% vs. 90.3%, 88.4% vs. 89.6%, 90.3% vs. 100%, and 89.5% vs. 94.7%, respectively. The number of specimens from NBI-targeted biopsy was significantly lower than that from Sydney protocol (311vs.475, P  < 0.001). Conclusions  Both NBI-targeted biopsy and Sydney protocol by a gastroenterologist who was not an expert in NBI and who has experience with diagnosis of at least 60 cases of GIM provided an NPV higher than 90%. Thus, targeted biopsy alone with NBI, which requires fewer specimens, is an alternative option for extensive GIM diagnosis. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9010080/ /pubmed/35433197 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1783-9081 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Faknak, Natee
Pittayanon, Rapat
Tiankanon, Kasenee
Lerttanatum, Nathawadee
Sanpavat, Anapat
Klaikaew, Naruemon
Rerknimitr, Rungsun
Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
title Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
title_full Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
title_fullStr Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
title_full_unstemmed Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
title_short Performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus Sydney protocol by non-NBI expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
title_sort performance status of targeted biopsy alone versus sydney protocol by non-nbi expert gastroenterologist in gastric intestinal metaplasia diagnosis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9010080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35433197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1783-9081
work_keys_str_mv AT faknaknatee performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis
AT pittayanonrapat performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis
AT tiankanonkasenee performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis
AT lerttanatumnathawadee performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis
AT sanpavatanapat performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis
AT klaikaewnaruemon performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis
AT rerknimitrrungsun performancestatusoftargetedbiopsyaloneversussydneyprotocolbynonnbiexpertgastroenterologistingastricintestinalmetaplasiadiagnosis