Background: It was gradually accepted that endoscopic fragment biopsy (EFB) diagnosis cannot accurately guarantee the absence of higher-grade neoplasms within the lesion of digestive tract. There are no well-established predictors for histopathologically upgrade discrepancies between EFB diagnosing colorectal low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN) and endoscopic resection (ER) specimens demonstrating higher-grade diseases. Methods: A total of 918 colorectal LGINs was histopathologically diagnosed by EFB, including 162 cases with histopathologically upgrade discrepancy and 756 concordant cases. We compared clinicopathological data and relevant pathologic results of EFB and ER specimen between these two groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to investigate predictors for this upgrade histopathology. Results: The predominant upgrade discrepancy of LGINs diagnosed by EFB was upgrades to high-grade dysplasia (n = 114, 70.4%), followed by upgrades to intramucosal carcinoma (n = 33, 20.3%), submucosal adenocarcinoma (n = 10, 6.2%) and advanced adenocarcinoma (n = 5, 3.1%). NSAID history (OR 4.83; 95 % CI, 2.27-10.27; P < 0.001), lack of standardization of EFB number (OR 2.99; 95 % CI, 1.91-4.68; P < 0.001), ≥ 1.0 cm maximum diameter of the target adenoma (OR 6.18; 95% CI, 1.32-28.99; P = 0.021), lobulated shape (OR 2.68; 95 % CI, 1.65-4.36; P < 0.001), erythema (OR 2.42; 95 % CI, 1.50-3.91; P < 0.001), erosion (OR 7.12; 95 % CI, 3.91-12.94; P < 0.001), surface unevenness (OR 2.31; 95 % CI, 1.33-4.01; P = 0.003) and distal location of the target adenoma (OR 3.29; 95% CI, 1.68-6.41; P < 0.001) were associated with the histologically upgrade discrepancies. Conclusion: NSAID history, lack of standardization of EFB number, adenoma size and location, abnormal macroscopic patterns are significant predictors for potentially upgrade histopathology of LGINs diagnosed by EFBs. The standardization of EFB and advanced imaging techniques could minimize the risk of neglecting potential this upgrade histopathology.
Background. It was gradually accepted that endoscopic fragment biopsy (EFB) diagnosis cannot accurately guarantee the absence of higher-grade neoplasms within the lesion of the digestive tract. There are no well-established predictors for histopathologically upgrade discrepancies between EFB diagnosing colorectal low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN) and endoscopic resection (ER) specimens. Methods. A total of 918 colorectal LGINs was histopathologically diagnosed by EFB, including 162 cases with upgrade discrepancy and 756 concordant cases. We compared clinicopathological data of EFB and ER specimens between these two groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors for this upgrade histopathology. Results. The predominant upgrade discrepancy of LGINs diagnosed by EFB was upgrades to high-grade dysplasia (114/918, 12.4%), followed by upgrades to intramucosal carcinoma (33/918, 3.6%), submucosal adenocarcinoma (10/918, 1.1%), and advanced adenocarcinoma (5/918, 0.5%). NSAID history (OR 4.83; 95% CI, 2.27-10.27; p < 0.001 ), insufficient EFB number (OR 2.99; 95% CI, 1.91-4.68; p < 0.001 ), maximum diameter ≥ 1.0 cm (OR 6.18; 95% CI, 1.32-28.99; p = 0.021 ), lobulated shape (OR 2.68; 95% CI, 1.65-4.36; p < 0.001 ), erythema (OR 2.42; 95% CI, 1.50-3.91; p < 0.001 ), erosion (OR 7.12; 95% CI, 3.91-12.94; p < 0.001 ), surface unevenness (OR 2.31; 95% CI, 1.33-4.01; p = 0.003 ), and distal location of the target adenoma (OR 3.29; 95% CI, 1.68-6.41; p < 0.001 ) were associated with the histologically upgrade discrepancies. Conclusion. NSAID history, insufficient EFB number, adenoma size and location, and abnormal macroscopic patterns are potential predictors for upgrade histopathology of LGINs diagnosed by EFBs. The standardization of EFB number and advanced imaging techniques could minimize the risk of neglecting the potential of this upgrade histopathology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.