Quality of endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus

<b>Objectives:</b> The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to Barrett’s esophagus (BE) surveillance guidelines in Denmark. <b>Methods:</b> The Danish Pathology Registry was used to identify 3692 patients. A total of 300 patients were included by drawing a simple random sample. Description of the BE segment, biopsy protocol, communication with the pathologist and planned follow-up endoscopy, was evaluated. <b>Results:</b> Thirty-one patients were excluded due to missing reports and 83 patients (28%) due to no endoscopic evidence of BE. Endoscopists suspected BE in 186 patients (62%) and these patients were included. Prague C&amp;M classification was used in 34% of the endoscopy reports. The median number of biopsies was 4 (interquartile range (IQR), 3–6). The BE segment was stratified by lengths of 1–5, 6–10 and 11–15 cm and endoscopists obtained a sufficient number of biopsies in 12, 8 and 0% of cases, respectively. 28% of endoscopists described the exact location of the biopsy site in the pathology requisition. Patients with nondysplastic BE had endoscopic surveillance performed after a median of 24 months (IQR, 6–24). <b>Conclusions:</b> Adherence to the Danish guidelines was poor. This may be associated with insufficient quality of BE surveillance. Lack of endoscopic evidence of BE in the Danish Pathology Registry may have underestimated the incidence of adenocarcinoma in BE patients in previous studies.