Risk and benefit to the study participant:Data on newer imaging method like NBI and AFI are mostly in the form of case series. This has not led to a change in the standard of care. The early data is very encouraging but not conclusive due to lack of randomized, controlled trials. Hence, we chose a study design of randomized controlled trial of the newer modalities versus the existing conventional endoscopy. This design necessitates the performance of a repeat endoscopy. Upper endoscopy is very safe, routinely done procedure with a low risk of complications. A repeat procedure may, indeed, increase the potential for risks associated with the procedure but the magnitude is small. The added advantage of second endoscopy would be increased detection of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma resulting in potential benefit to the patients. The main reason for the performance of the current study is the limitation of conventional endoscopy with the implication that dysplasia and adenocarcinoma will be missed on the initial endoscopy. In clinical practice, this usually warrants a follow up endoscopy that is performed at 1-3 yr intervals due to time and cost constraints. For the study population of this trial, the second endoscopy has the potential for increased detection of dysplasia/early adenocarcinoma in the Barrett's segment that could lead to initiation of curative therapy.