1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5085(99)70123-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Specialized intestinal metaplasia, dysplasia, and cancer of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction: Prevalence and clinical data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

20
273
5
19

Year Published

2000
2000
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 476 publications
(317 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
20
273
5
19
Order By: Relevance
“…While several previous studies stated that patients with SSBE may develop dysplasia (Sharma et al, 1997) and EAC (Rudolph et al, 2000), some prospective studies have shown an increased risk of EAC development only in patients with LSBE (Weston et al, 1997;Hirota et al, 1999;Hage et al, 2004). Rudolph et al (2000) demonstrated that segment length was not related to cancer risk in a prospective cohort study of 309 Barrett's patients followed in the Seattle Barrett's Esophagus Project (P>0.2); however, when patients with HGD at entrance were excluded, a strong trend was observed, with a 5 cm difference in length associated with a 1.7-fold increase in cancer risk (95% confidence interval, 0.8-to 3.8-fold).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While several previous studies stated that patients with SSBE may develop dysplasia (Sharma et al, 1997) and EAC (Rudolph et al, 2000), some prospective studies have shown an increased risk of EAC development only in patients with LSBE (Weston et al, 1997;Hirota et al, 1999;Hage et al, 2004). Rudolph et al (2000) demonstrated that segment length was not related to cancer risk in a prospective cohort study of 309 Barrett's patients followed in the Seattle Barrett's Esophagus Project (P>0.2); however, when patients with HGD at entrance were excluded, a strong trend was observed, with a 5 cm difference in length associated with a 1.7-fold increase in cancer risk (95% confidence interval, 0.8-to 3.8-fold).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Weston et al (1997) reported significant differences between SSBE and LSBE in the frequency of both dysplasia and EAC, at 8.1 vs 24.4% for dysplasia (Po0.0001) and 0 vs 15.4% for EAC (Po0.0005). Hirota et al (1999) reported that the prevalence of dysplasia and cancer differed significantly in patients with SSBE vs patients with LSBE in a comprehensive prospective study of 889 consecutive patients. More recently, Hage et al (2004) reported a significantly increased risk of progression to HGD or EAC with LSBE after a mean follow-up of 12.7 years.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Intrasphincteric acid exposure may explain how metaplasia of the distal esophagus is most prevalent at, and immediately proximal to, the SCJ and can occur in subjects without conventional evidence of refl ux disease. It could also account for short-segment Barrett ' s esophagus being several times more prevalent than long-segment Barrett ' s esophagus ( 30 ). It is provocative to note that, as bile acids have been detected within the acid pocket of healthy volunteers ( 31,32 ), this may explain why short-segment Barrett ' s esophagus has no association with GERD symptoms ( 33 ).…”
Section: The Acid Pocket In Health and Diseasementioning
confidence: 99%
“…30 According to recent reports from Western countries, the prevalence of BE (histologically confirmed by the presence of goblet cell metaplasia/specialized columnar epithelium), LSBE, and SSBE is 1.6-25.0%, 0.5-7.2%, and 1.1-17.2%, respectively. 8,[40][41][42][43][44] In these reports, most of the patients included were Caucasian and had reflux symptoms like heartburn. A multicenter prospective study recently done in Japan showed that an overall prevalence of endoscopically suspected BE was 24.1%, of which 99.2% were SSBE.…”
Section: Significance and Prevalence Of Barrett's Esophagusmentioning
confidence: 99%