Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Biopsy Sampling in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Survey from 10 Tertiary Referral Centres across Europe

  • Jan Alexander Bornschein*
  • , Terry Tran-Nguyen
  • , Gloria Fernandez-Esparrach
  • , Stephen Ash
  • , Francesc Balaguer
  • , Elisabeth L. Bird-Lieberman
  • , Henry Córdova
  • , Zane Dzērve
  • , Matteo Fassan
  • , Mārcis Leja
  • , Ivan Lyutakov
  • , Tim Middelburg
  • , Leticia Moreira
  • , Radislav Nakov
  • , Stella A.V. Nieuwenburg
  • , Anthony O'Connor
  • , Stefano Realdon
  • , Heiko De Schepper
  • , Annemieke Smet
  • , M. C.W. Spaander
  • Ivars Tolmanis, Tadas Urbonas, Jochen Weigt, Georgina L. Hold, Alexander Link, Juozas Kupcinskas
*Corresponding author for this work
    • John Radcliffe Hospital
    • Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg
    • Oxford University Hospitals Trust
    • University of Barcelona
    • University of Oxford
    • University of Latvia
    • University of Padua
    • Medical University Sofia
    • Erasmus University Rotterdam
    • Tallaght University Hospital
    • IRCCS Istituto Oncologico Veneto - Padova
    • University of Antwerp
    • Lithuanian University of Health Sciences
    • University of New South Wales

    Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: Guidelines give robust recommendations on which biopsies should be taken when there is endoscopic suggestion of gastric inflammation. Adherence to these guidelines often seems arbitrary. This study aimed to give an overview on current practice in tertiary referral centres across Europe. Methods: Data were collected at 10 tertiary referral centres. Demographic data, the indication for each procedure, endoscopic findings, and the number and sampling site of biopsies were recorded. Findings were compared between centres, and factors influencing the decision to take biopsies were explored. Results: Biopsies were taken in 56.6% of 9,425 procedures, with significant variation between centres (p < 0.001). Gastric biopsies were taken in 43.8% of all procedures. Sampling location varied with the procedure indication (p < 0.001) without consistent pattern across the centres. Fewer biopsies were taken in centres which routinely applied the updated Sydney classification for gastritis assessment (46.0%), compared to centres where this was done only upon request (75.3%, p < 0.001). This was the same for centres stratifying patients according to the OLGA system (51.8 vs. 73.0%, p < 0.001). More biopsies were taken in centres following the MAPS guidelines on stomach surveillance (68.1 vs. 37.1%, p < 0.001). Biopsy sampling was more likely in younger patients in 8 centres (p < 0.05), but this was not true for the whole cohort (p = 0.537). The percentage of procedures with biopsies correlated directly with additional costs charged in case of biopsies (r = 0.709, p = 0.022). Conclusion: Adherence to guideline recommendations for biopsy sampling at gastroscopy was inconsistent across the participating centres. Our data suggest that centre-specific policies are applied instead.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)179-189
    JournalDigestive Diseases
    Volume39
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May 2021

    OECD Field of Science

    • 3. Medical and Health Sciences

    Keywords

    • Biopsy sampling
    • CLO test
    • Gastritis
    • Gastroscopy
    • MAPS
    • OLGA
    • Sydney

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Biopsy Sampling in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Survey from 10 Tertiary Referral Centres across Europe'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this