Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 15679414

Is there a way for pathologists to decrease interobserver variability in the diagnosis of dysplasia?

Abstract

Many obstacles interfere with our efforts to screen patients with Barrett esophagus. Probably the largest is choosing the appropriate patient group for screening. Beyond this problem, sampling error on the part of endoscopists is probably more serious a problem than observer variation among pathologists reviewing patient samples. Pathologists agree well on lesions that merit close follow-up or other intervention (high-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma), although interobserver agreement between pathologists interpreting lesser lesions is not good. This lack of agreement is not likely to improve substantially, and many adjunct markers are being sought in an attempt to identify patients with lesions of lower grades that are most likely to progress, allowing doctors to identify patients who would benefit from upgraded surveillance.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elizabeth Montgomery. 2005. Is there a way for pathologists to decrease interobserver variability in the diagnosis of dysplasia?. https://doi.org/10.5858/2005-129-174-itawfp

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Review article: from 1906 to 2006--a century of major evolution of understanding of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Our understanding of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease has undergone significant changes over the last century. AIM: To trace the rise in understanding of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and highlight remaining areas of uncertainty. METHODS: Literature review. RESULTS: In 1906, Tileston published his observations on 'peptic ulcer of the oesophagus'. Winkelstein, in 1934, first correlated symptoms of heartburn with acid regurgitation and reflux oesophagitis. In 1946, Allison described hiatus hernia as a causal factor in the development of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. In 1958, Bernstein and Baker showed a direct relationship between oesophageal acidification and heartburn in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, irrespective of endoscopic findings, leading to the recognition of non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. In the 1980s, continuous recordings of the lower oesophageal sphincter showed that episodes of reflux were related to transient relaxations of lower oesophageal sphincter tone. There is now increasing recognition that gastro-oesophageal reflux disease arises from the interaction of several anatomical and physiological factors. A turning point in the medical treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease came with the introduction of the first proton pump inhibitor, omeprazole, in 1989. CONCLUSIONS: Future efforts need to identify the multifactorial interactions of gastro-oesophageal junction anatomy and physiology in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Increased understanding of the disease will guide development of new therapies.

Barrett Esophagus↗

Prospective follow-up data from the ProGERD study suggest that GERD is not a categorial disease.

OBJECTIVES: There is a controversy as to whether gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) exists as a spectrum of disease severity or as a categorial disease in three distinct groups: nonerosive (NERD) and erosive reflux disease (ERD) and Barrett's esophagus (BE). Aim of the study was to assess progression or regression of GERD over 2 yr in a large cohort of patients (N = 3,894) under routine clinical care in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (ProGERD study). METHOD: Patients with predominant heartburn, with or without esophagitis, were recruited and classified according to endoscopic status at baseline, i.e., NERD, erosive reflux disease-Los Angeles (ERD-LA) grade A/B and ERD-LA grade C/D, and BE. After an initial treatment with esomeprazole, they were followed, regardless of their response. Medical therapy or endoscopy was initiated at the discretion of their primary care physician, in line with routine care. At 2 yr, endoscopy with biopsy was performed according to the protocol. RESULTS: After 2 yr, 25% of patients who had NERD at baseline progressed to LA A/B and 0.6% to LA C/D; 1.6% of patients who had LA A/B progressed to LA C/D and 61% regressed to NERD; 42% of patients who had LA C/D regressed to LA A/B and 50% regressed to NERD (all figures exclude patients with confirmed BE at baseline). At 2 yr, 22% of patients had been off medication for at least 3 months. Patients with ERD-LA grade C/D were at greatest risk of developing BE: 5.8% compared with 1.4% for ERD-LA grade A/B and 0.5% for NERD. CONCLUSION: GERD does not seem to be a categorial disease. Progression and regression between grades was observed in this large cohort of patients under routine clinical care.

Barrett Esophagus↗