Surveillance for Barrett's oesophagus in the UK

Author:

Smith A M1,Maxwell-Armstrong C A1,Welch N T1,Scholefield J H1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Surgery, E Floor, West Block, University Hospital, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK

Abstract

Abstract Background Endoscopic screening for Barrett's oesophagus is being offered without evidence of efficacy Barrett's oesophagus is not an ideal candidate for a screening programme, as the natural history is unclear, uncertainties surround the indication for intervention and the treatment is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Methods To determine the practices that clinicians employ in the management of Barrett's oesophagus in the UK, postal questionnaires were sent in May 1997 to 297 randomly selected members of the British Society of Gastroenterology asking for details of their current practice. Results Of 152 respondents, 106 (70 per cent) performed surveillance for Barrett's oesophagus; 46 (30 per cent) did not carry out screening. There was no difference in the practices carried out by physicians or surgeons, teaching or acute general hospital clinicians, or those with an upper gastrointestinal interest. There was a wide disparity in screening interval: just over half (52 per cent) screen at yearly intervals. Only nine (8 per cent) took four quadrant biopsies per 2 cm of Barrett's oesophagus. Nearly half (49 per cent) manage mild dysplasia by increasing the frequency of endoscopy; only seven (7 per cent) prescribed patients a proton pump inhibiting agent. Faced with severe dysplasia, 33 (31 per cent) offered surgery immediately; 22 (21 per cent) simply followed the patient by endoscopy. Those not choosing to perform screening most frequently cited lack of evidence of efficacy as the reason behind their decision. Conclusion There is wide variation in surveillance practices for Barrett's oesophagus. Some methods are ineffectual. The recommendations made by the Barrett's Oesophagus Working Party in 1991 are not followed, possibly because they are not practical. New workable guidelines based on available evidence and a consensus of expert opinion should be established; this was suggested by 38 per cent of respondents who performed screening.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3