AIMS: To assess the interobserver agreement in the reporting of colorectal polyps among histopathologists participating in the Welsh Bowel Cancer Screening (BCS) programme. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twelve benign polyps representative of BCS cases were identified from pathology files and reported by 28 BCS histopathologists using proforma sheets. The level of agreement between the participants and a gold standard was determined using kappa (κ) statistics. A moderate level of agreement was achieved in the reporting of polyp type [κ = 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.59] and adenomatous lesions were distinguished from non-adenomatous lesions in 96% of cases. Substantial agreement was obtained in distinguishing low- and high-grade dysplasias (κ = 0.67; 95% CI 0.50-0.86), but there was only fair agreement in reporting excision margin status (κ = 0.24; 95% CI 0.07-0.43) with frequent use of the 'uncertain' category. Significant issues included categorizing serrated lesions, recognizing focal high-grade dysplasia and epithelial misplacement, and apparent overdiagnosis of villous change in adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver variability in some aspects of reporting colorectal polyps by BCS pathologists is suboptimal, with a potential impact upon patient management and the efficient running of the screening service. Approaches to addressing this are discussed.
AIMS: To assess the interobserver agreement in the reporting of colorectal polyps among histopathologists participating in the Welsh Bowel Cancer Screening (BCS) programme. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twelve benign polyps representative of BCS cases were identified from pathology files and reported by 28 BCS histopathologists using proforma sheets. The level of agreement between the participants and a gold standard was determined using kappa (κ) statistics. A moderate level of agreement was achieved in the reporting of polyp type [κ = 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.59] and adenomatous lesions were distinguished from non-adenomatous lesions in 96% of cases. Substantial agreement was obtained in distinguishing low- and high-grade dysplasias (κ = 0.67; 95% CI 0.50-0.86), but there was only fair agreement in reporting excision margin status (κ = 0.24; 95% CI 0.07-0.43) with frequent use of the 'uncertain' category. Significant issues included categorizing serrated lesions, recognizing focal high-grade dysplasia and epithelial misplacement, and apparent overdiagnosis of villous change in adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver variability in some aspects of reporting colorectal polyps by BCS pathologists is suboptimal, with a potential impact upon patient management and the efficient running of the screening service. Approaches to addressing this are discussed.
Authors: Said Din; Alex J Ball; Eleanor Taylor; Matthew Rutter; Stuart A Riley; Shawinder Johal Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-01-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mustafa Nasir-Moin; Arief A Suriawinata; Bing Ren; Xiaoying Liu; Douglas J Robertson; Srishti Bagchi; Naofumi Tomita; Jason W Wei; Todd A MacKenzie; Judy R Rees; Saeed Hassanpour Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-11-01
Authors: Lisanne J H Smits; Elisa Vink-Börger; Gesina van Lijnschoten; Isabelle Focke-Snieders; Rachel S van der Post; Jurriaan B Tuynman; Nicole C T van Grieken; Iris D Nagtegaal Journal: Histopathology Date: 2022-01-10 Impact factor: 7.778
Authors: Priyanka Kanth; Katherine E Boylan; Mary P Bronner; Kenneth M Boucher; Mark W Hazel; Ruoxin Yao; Stelian Pop; Philip S Bernard; Don A Delker Journal: Clin Transl Gastroenterol Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 4.488
Authors: Sara P Oliveira; Pedro C Neto; João Fraga; Diana Montezuma; Ana Monteiro; João Monteiro; Liliana Ribeiro; Sofia Gonçalves; Isabel M Pinto; Jaime S Cardoso Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 4.379