Overview of 2018 surveillance methods

NICE's surveillance team checked whether recommendations in Barrett's oesophagus: ablative therapy (NICE guideline CG106) remain up to date.

The surveillance process consisted of:

  • Initial feedback from topic experts via a questionnaire.

  • Input from stakeholders on known variations in practice and policy priorities.

  • Literature searches to identify relevant evidence.

  • Assessing the new evidence against current recommendations and deciding whether or not to update sections of the guideline, or the whole guideline.

  • Consulting on the decision with stakeholders, except if we propose to update and replace the whole guideline.

  • Considering comments received during consultation and making any necessary changes to the decision.

For further details about the process and the possible update decisions that are available, see ensuring that published guidelines are current and accurate in developing NICE guidelines: the manual.

Evidence considered in surveillance

Search and selection strategy

We searched for new evidence related to the whole guideline.

We found 36 studies in a search for randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published between 1 May 2009 and 21 June 2018.

We also included 3 relevant studies from a total of 5 identified by topic experts.

From all sources, we considered 39 studies to be relevant to the guideline.

See appendix A: summary of evidence from surveillance for details of all evidence considered, and references.

Ongoing research

We checked for relevant ongoing research; of the ongoing studies identified, 2 studies were assessed as having the potential to change recommendations; therefore we plan to regularly check whether these studies have published results, and evaluate the impact of the results on current recommendations as quickly as possible. These studies are:

Intelligence gathered during surveillance

Views of topic experts

We sent questionnaires to 5 topic experts and received 2 responses. The topic experts were recruited to the NICE Centre for Guidelines Expert Advisers Panel to represent their specialty.

Topic experts indicated that the guideline was out of date and no longer reflected clinical practice in the UK. Areas of interest included treatment of low-grade dysplasia and early stage oesophageal cancer.

Other sources of information

We considered all other correspondence received since the guideline was published. This included a suggestion the guideline should address treatment of low-grade dysplasia.

Views of stakeholders

Stakeholders are consulted on all surveillance proposals except if the whole guideline will be updated and replaced. Because this surveillance decision was to fully update the guideline, we did not consult on the decision.

See ensuring that published guidelines are current and accurate in developing NICE guidelines: the manual for more details on our consultation processes.


No equalities issues were identified during the surveillance process.

Overall decision

After considering all evidence and other intelligence and the impact on current recommendations, we decided that a full update is necessary.

ISBN: 978-1-4731-3177-4

This page was last updated: 29 November 2018