Evidence Hub

Prevalence of Barrett’s Esophagus and Adenocarcinoma With and Without Gastroesophageal Reflux: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Bibek Saha, K. Vantanasiri, Babu P. Mohan, R. Goyal, Nikita Garg, Danielle Gerberi, J. Kisiel, Siddharth Singh et al.

Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2023

51,350 participants · 46 citations

Abstract

Background and Aims: While gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms are an essential criterion for Barrett’s esophagus (BE) screening in most gastroenterology society guidelines, a significant proportion of BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) cases do not endorse them. In a systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM), we aimed to study the prevalence of BE/EAC in those with and without GERD. Methods: A systematic search was conducted through 5 major databases for studies reporting prevalence of BE/EAC in patients with and without GERD. Pooled proportions and odds ratios (OR) of BE, long-segment BE (LSBE), short-segment BE (SSBE), dysplasia and EAC in patients with and without GERD were synthesized. Results: Forty-three articles (12,883 patients with; 51,350 patients without GERD) were included in the final analysis. BE prevalence was 7% (95% CI 5.8–8.5) and 2.2% (1.6–3) among individuals with and without GERD, respectively. EAC prevalence was 0.6% (0.4–1) and 0.1% (0–0.2) in those with and without GERD, respectively. The overall risks for BE (OR=2.91; 2.06–4.11) and LSBE (OR=4.17; 1.78–9.77) were higher in patients with GERD, but the risk for SSBE (OR=1.77; 0.89–3.52) did not differ between the two groups. In 9 population-based high-quality studies (2244 patients with; 3724 patients without GERD), BE prevalence in patients without GERD was 4.9% (95% CI 2.6–9). BE prevalence was highest in North American studies (10.6% [GERD] and 4.8% [non-GERD]). Conclusion: BE…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 51,350 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free