4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus: Short-Term Results

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 87, Issue 2, Pages 405-411

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.11.043

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The presence of Barrett's esophagus (BE) increases the risk of esophageal cancer. Total regression of BE is uncommon with medication or laparoscopic fundoplication, and endoscopic techniques to obliterate BE have varied results. This study evaluated the early results of a balloon-based catheter radiofrequency ablation (RFA) system in patients with medically refractory reflux symptoms and biopsy-proven BE. Methods. The medical records of 27 consecutive patients who underwent RFA for BE from March 2005 through January 2007 were reviewed. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was performed before ablation to document presence of BE and no cancer and at 8 weeks after the RFA to assess the presence of residual BE. Results. Mean patient age was 53.6 +/-12.5 years; 16 (59%) were men. The average length of the Barrett segment treated was 4.6 +/-4.7 cm. Two patients (7.4%) had low-grade dysplasia. No patient had high-grade dysplasia and cancer. There was no periprocedural morbidity or at follow-up, no postprocedure dysphagia or stricture. In all patients, the BE was completely replaced with normal squamous epithelium. Symptoms regressed in 16 patients (60%) with RFA and proton pump inhibitor therapy. Eleven required an antireflux procedure for persistent symptoms. Conclusions. Short-term results show that RFA for BE is safe and achieves 100% replacement of intestinal metaplasia. RFA of BE combined with fundoplication may be offered to patients with BE and medically refractory reflux symptoms. Long-term endoscopic surveillance is needed to determine if the risk of cancer is reduced with this bimodality therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available