Literature DB >> 9434214

The pathologic measurement of polyp size is preferable to the endoscopic estimate.

R E Schoen1, L D Gerber, C Margulies.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is no standardized technique to measure polyp size. Estimation of polyp size at endoscopy is difficult. Polyp size measurement by pathologists would seem to be an accurate alternative, but tissue fixation may alter polyp size. To evaluate methods of determining polyp size, we compared endoscopists' estimates and pathologists' measurements with measurements made by an independent examiner.
METHODS: Polyps were measured by an independent investigator before and after formalin fixation. The investigator's measurement before fixation (the "gold standard") was compared with the endoscopists' estimates and the pathologists' measurements.
RESULTS: Ten endoscopists removed 61 polyps with a snare in 33 patients: 82% were adenomatous and 72% were pedunculated. Mean size was 0.85 +/- 0.6 cm (SD) (range: 0.3 to 3.6 cm, 26% > or = 1 cm). Polyps remained in formalin for a mean of 239 minutes (46 to 1164 minutes). Polyps neither consistently shrank nor enlarged in formalin (maximum change +/- 0.2 cm, r = 0.99 [p < 0.001]). Interobserver agreement between pathologists' and the investigator's post-formalin measurements showed that 55 of 57 polyps (97%) were within +/- 0.3 cm. Endoscopists inaccurately estimated 11 of 56 polyps (20%) (> 0.3 cm difference from the independent examiner). Polyp size was underestimated in three instances (range 0.5 to 0.9 cm) and overestimated in eight (range 0.4 to 0.8 cm). In 5 of 11 instances (46%), this inaccuracy altered polyp size classification across the 1 cm threshold. Results were not dependent on endoscopist, histology, or polyp location.
CONCLUSIONS: (1) Polyp size is not significantly affected by formalin fixation; 2) Endoscopists' estimates of polyp size are often unreliable; and, when possible, (3) Pathologists' measurements of polyp size should be used in clinical trials and in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9434214     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(97)70002-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  52 in total

1.  Characteristics of advanced- and non advanced sporadic polypoid colorectal adenomas: correlation to KRAS mutations.

Authors:  Enkh-Amar Yadamsuren; Szilvia Nagy; Laszlo Pajor; Agnes Lacza; Barna Bogner
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2012-06-23       Impact factor: 3.201

Review 2.  Polyp size measurement at CT colonography: what do we know and what do we need to know?

Authors:  Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Next-generation stool DNA test accurately detects colorectal cancer and large adenomas.

Authors:  David A Ahlquist; Hongzhi Zou; Michael Domanico; Douglas W Mahoney; Tracy C Yab; William R Taylor; Malinda L Butz; Stephen N Thibodeau; Linda Rabeneck; Lawrence F Paszat; Kenneth W Kinzler; Bert Vogelstein; Niels Chr Bjerregaard; Søren Laurberg; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Barry M Berger; Graham P Lidgard
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2011-11-04       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting.

Authors:  David Burling; Steve Halligan; Douglas G Altman; Wendy Atkin; Clive Bartram; Helen Fenlon; Andrea Laghi; Jaap Stoker; Stuart Taylor; Roger Frost; Guido Dessey; Melinda De Villiers; Jasper Florie; Shane Foley; Lesley Honeyfield; Riccardo Iannaccone; Teresa Gallo; Clive Kay; Philippe Lefere; Andrew Lowe; Filipo Mangiapane; Jesse Marrannes; Emmanuele Neri; Giulia Nieddu; David Nicholson; Alan O'Hare; Sante Ori; Benedetta Politi; Martin Poulus; Daniele Regge; Lisa Renaut; Velauthan Rudralingham; Saverio Signoretta; Paola Vagli; Victor Van der Hulst; Jane Williams-Butt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-04-25       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Risk factors for bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection.

Authors:  Masatsugu Shiba; Kazuhide Higuchi; Kaori Kadouchi; Ai Montani; Kazuki Yamamori; Hirotoshi Okazaki; Makiko Taguchi; Tomoko Wada; Atsushi Itani; Toshio Watanabe; Kazunari Tominaga; Yoshihiro Fujiwara; Tomoshige Hayashi; Kei Tsumura; Tetsuo Arakawa
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-12-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Smoking and the association of advanced colorectal neoplasia in an asymptomatic average risk population: analysis of exposure and anatomical location in men and women.

Authors:  Joseph C Anderson; Koorosh Moezardalan; Catherine R Messina; Michael Latreille; Robert D Shaw
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Measurement of colonic polyps by radiologists and endoscopists: who is most accurate?

Authors:  S Punwani; S Halligan; P Irving; S Bloom; A Bungay; R Greenhalgh; J Godbold; S A Taylor; D G Altman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-01-04       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Characterization of the pathologic and endoscopic measurements of colorectal polyp sizes with a focus on sessile serrated adenoma and high-grade dysplasia.

Authors:  Fan Li; Zheng Chen; Yu Yang; Xianghua Yi; Yunsheng Yang; Lanjing Zhang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-03-15

9.  Endoscopic estimation of tumor size in early gastric cancer.

Authors:  Jeongmin Choi; Sang Gyun Kim; Jong Pil Im; Joo Sung Kim; Hyun Chae Jung
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 3.199

10.  Prevalence of colon polyps detected by colonoscopy screening in asymptomatic black and white patients.

Authors:  David A Lieberman; Jennifer L Holub; Matthew D Moravec; Glenn M Eisen; Dawn Peters; Cynthia D Morris
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-09-24       Impact factor: 56.272

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.