Sreekar Vennelaganti
University of Kansas
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Sreekar Vennelaganti.
World Journal of Gastroenterology | 2016
Harsha Moole; Jaymon Patel; Zohair Ahmed; Abhiram Duvvuri; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Vishnu Moole; Sowmya Dharmapuri; Raghuveer R. Boddireddy; Pratyusha Yedama; Naveen Bondalapati; Achuta Uppu; Prashanth Vennelaganti; Srinivas R. Puli
AIM To evaluate annual incidence of low grade dysplasia (LGD) progression to high grade dysplasia (HGD) and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) when diagnosis was made by two or more expert pathologists. METHODS Studies evaluating the progression of LGD to HGD or EAC were included. The diagnosis of LGD must be made by consensus of two or more expert gastrointestinal pathologists. Articles were searched in Medline, Pubmed, and Embase. Pooled proportions were calculated using fixed and random effects model. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS Initial search identified 721 reference articles, of which 53 were selected and reviewed. Twelve studies (n = 971) that met the inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. Among the total original LGD diagnoses in the included studies, only 37.49% reached the consensus LGD diagnosis after review by two or more expert pathologists. Total follow up period was 1532 patient-years. In the pooled consensus LGD patients, the annual incidence rate (AIR) of progression to HGD and or EAC was 10.35% (95%CI: 7.56-13.13) and progression to EAC was 5.18% (95%CI: 3.43-6.92). Among the patients down staged from original LGD diagnosis to No-dysplasia Barrett’s esophagus, the AIR of progression to HGD and EAC was 0.65% (95%CI: 0.49-0.80). Among the patients down staged to Indefinite for dysplasia, the AIR of progression to HGD and EAC was 1.42% (95%CI: 1.19-1.65). In patients with consensus HGD diagnosis, the AIR of progression to EAC was 28.63% (95%CI: 13.98-43.27). CONCLUSION When LGD is diagnosed by consensus agreement of two or more expert pathologists, its progression towards malignancy seems to be at least three times the current estimates, however it could be up to 20 times the current estimates. Biopsies of all Barrett’s esophagus patients with LGD should be reviewed by two expert gastroenterology pathologists. Follow-up strict surveillance programs should be in place for these patients.
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology | 2018
Nour Hamade; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Sravanthi Parasa; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Srinivas Gaddam; Manon Spaander; Sophie H. van Olphen; Prashanthi N. Thota; Kevin F. Kennedy; Marco J. Bruno; John J. Vargo; Sharad C. Mathur; Brooks D. Cash; Richard E. Sampliner; Neil Gupta; Gary W. Falk; Ajay Bansal; Patrick E. Young; David A. Lieberman; Prateek Sharma
BACKGROUND & AIMS: European guidelines recommend different surveillance intervals of non‐dysplastic Barretts esophagus (NDBE) based on segment length, as opposed to guidelines in the United States, which do recommend surveillance intervals based on BE length. We studied rates of progression of NDBE to high‐grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with short‐segment BE using the definition of BE in the latest guidelines (length ≥1 cm). METHODS: We collected demographic, clinical, endoscopy, and histopathology data from 1883 patients with endoscopic evidence of NDBE (mean age, 57.3 years; 83.5% male; 88.1% Caucasians) seen at 7 tertiary referral centers. Patients were followed for a median 6.4 years. Cases of dysplasia or EAC detected within 1 year of index endoscopy were considered prevalent and were excluded. Unadjusted rates of progression to HGD or EAC were compared between patients with short (≥1 and <3) and long (≥3) BE lengths using log‐rank tests. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients with a documented Prague C&M classification. We used a multivariable proportional hazards model to evaluate the association between BE length and progression. Adjusted hazards ratios were calculated after adjusting for variables associated with progression. RESULTS: We found 822 patients to have a short‐segment BE (SSBE) and 1061 to have long segment BE (LSBE). We found patients with SSBE to have a significantly lower annual rate of progression to EAC (0.07%) than of patients with LSBE (0.25%) (P = .001). For the combined endpoint of HGD or EAC, annual progression rates were significantly lower among patients with SSBE (0.29%) compared to compared to LSBE (0.91%) (P < .001). This effect persisted in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18–0.57; P < .001). CONCLUSION: We analyzed progression of BE (length ≥1 cm) to HGD or EAC in a large cohort of patients seen at multiple centers and followed for a median 6.4 years. We found a lower annual rate of progression of SSBE to EAC (0.07%/year) than of LSBE (0.25%/year). We propose lengthening current surveillance intervals for patients with SSBE.
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2017
Madhav Desai; Shreyas Saligram; Neil Gupta; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Ajay Bansal; Abhishek Choudhary; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Jianghua He; Mohammad A. Titi; Roberta Maselli; Bashar J. Qumseya; Mojtaba Olyaee; Irwing Waxman; Alessandro Repici; Cesare Hassan; Prateek Sharma
Gastroenterology | 2017
Prashanthi N. Thota; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Patrick E. Young; Srinivas Gaddam; Neil Gupta; David A. Lieberman; Richard E. Sampliner; Gary W. Falk; Sharad C. Mathur; Kevin F. Kennedy; Brooks D. Cash; Fouad J. Moawad; Ajay Bansal; Manon Spaander; Marco J. Bruno; John J. Vargo; Prateek Sharma
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2017
Madhav Desai; Andre Sanchez-Yague; Abhishek Choudhary; Asad Pervez; Neil Gupta; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Sreekar Vennelaganti; A. Fugazza; Alessandro Repici; Cesare Hassan; Prateek Sharma
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2015
Harathi Yandrapu; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Sravanthi Parasa; Tarun Rai; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Vijay Kanakadandi; Sameer Siddique; Mohammad A. Titi; Ajay Bansal; Alessandro Repici; Prateek Sharma; Abhishek Choudhary
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2016
Madhav Desai; Neil Gupta; Abhishek Choudhary; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Sandro Sferrazza; Alessandro Repici; Cesare Hassan; Prateek Sharma
Gastroenterology | 2016
Madhav Desai; Shreyas Saligram; Neil Gupta; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Ajay Bansal; Abhishek Choudhary; Mohammad A. Titi; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Roberta Maselli; Bashar J. Qumseya; Mojtaba Olyaee; Irving Waxman; Alessandro Repici; Prateek Sharma; Cesare Hassan
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2018
Ramprasad Jegadeesan; Venkata Subhash Gorrepati; Abhiram Duvvuri; Madhav Desai; Viveksandeep Thogulva Chandrasekar; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Pratiksha Singh; April D. Higbee; Kevin F. Kennedy; Irving Waxman; Gary W. Falk; Andrew S. Ross; Rajesh Krishnamoorthi; Ahmed Saeed; Anjana Sathyamurthy; Tarun Rai; Abhishek Choudhary; Alessandro Repici; Neil Gupta; Prateek Sharma
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2018
Venkata Subhash Gorrepati; Abhiram Duvvuri; Prashanth Vennalaganti; Ramprasad Jegadeesan; Nour Hamade; Sreekar Vennelaganti; Madhav Desai; Viveksandeep Thogulva Chandrasekar; Pratiksha Singh; Kevin F. Kennedy; April D. Higbee; Tarun Rai; Abhishek Choudhary; Anjana Sathyamurthy; Ahmed Saeed; Rajesh Krishnamoorthi; Gary W. Falk; Andrew S. Ross; Irving Waxman; Alessandro Repici; Neil Gupta; Prateek Sharma