Index diagnoses of gastric intestinal metaplasia in the United States: patient characteristics, endoscopic findings, and clinical practice patterns at a large tertiary care center
| Autor: | Sheeva K. Parbhu, Shailja C. Shah, Michael J. Sossenheimer, John C. Fang, Kathryn A. Peterson, Andrew J. Gawron |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2022 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology, Vol 15 (2022) |
| Druh dokumentu: | article |
| ISSN: | 1756-2848 17562848 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/17562848221117640 |
| Popis: | Background: Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is a premalignant gastric mucosal change that is often incidentally detected during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Despite the established higher risk of gastric cancer associated with GIM, the incidence, prevalence, and outcomes data for GIM are limited in the United States (US), and practice patterns are highly variable. Objectives: Our primary objectives were to accurately identify incident histology-confirmed GIM cases and determine patient characteristics, endoscopy findings, Helicobacter pylori (HP) detection, and eradication treatment outcomes, as well as surveillance and follow-up recommendations. Design: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using administrative data. Methods: We first developed and validated a rule-based natural language processing tool to identify the patients with GIM on gastrointestinal pathology reports between 2011 and 2016. We then performed a manual chart review of all EGD procedures and associated pathology notes to confirm cases and obtain clinically relevant data. Results: In all, 414 patients with an index diagnosis of GIM were confirmed (prevalence = 2.5% of patients undergoing any EGD). A majority (52.4%) of patients were non-Hispanic white. The most common indication for EGD was abdominal pain (46.9%). A majority (55%) did not receive specific follow-up recommendations or were asked to see their primary care provider. HP testing was documented in 86% of patients, and detected in 94 patients (prevalence = 26.4%). Treatment was documented in 94.7% of cases, and eradication confirmed in only 34.8% of these cases. Conclusion: A large group of US patients with an index diagnosis of GIM was accurately identified. There was wide variability in clinical practice patterns including biopsy practice, HP treatment and eradication confirmation testing, and surveillance recommendations. This work demonstrates that there is a major unmet need for quality improvement efforts to standardize care for patients with GIM, a premalignant condition, and inform future prospective studies in a US population. |
| Databáze: | Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|