AIM: To examine the discrepancy, if any, between the endoscopist's estimate and pathologist's measurement of colonic polyp size. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 88 patients who underwent colonoscopy with a...AIM: To examine the discrepancy, if any, between the endoscopist's estimate and pathologist's measurement of colonic polyp size. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 88 patients who underwent colonoscopy with a clear unequivocal documentation of polyp size by both the endoscopist and pathologist. Endoscopist measurements were based on the visual estimate of polyp size seen on high definition screens. The measurement was done by our pathologists after formalin fixation. We compared the endoscopist estimate of the polyp size to the pathologist measurement in order to explore the discordance between the two readings. Data regarding demographics and method of polypectomy(snare polypectomy vs excisional biopsy) was collected, as well. Statistical analysis software statistical software was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Our cohort included 88 patients from which 111 polyps were removed. Fifty-two(46.8%) of the 111 polyps were excised using biopsy forceps and fiftynine(53.2%) were removed by snare. In the biopsy forceps group, the mean polyp size documented by the pathologist was 0.38 ± 0.19 cm and the mean polyp size documented by the endoscopist was 0.54 ± 0.16cm. The mean difference was 0.15 cm(P < 0.001). In the snare group, the mean polyp size documented by the pathologist was 0.54 ± 0.24 cm and the mean polyp size documented by the endoscopist 0.97 ± 0.34 cm. The mean difference was 0.42 cm(P < 0.001). Combining both groups, the mean size documented by pathologist was 0.46 ± 0.23 cm compared to 0.76 ± 0.35 cm documented by the endoscopist. The mean difference was 0.3 cm(95%CI: 0.23-0.36).CONCLUSION: Post polypectomy measurement by the pathologist are generally smaller than the endoscopist's estimate.展开更多
文摘AIM: To examine the discrepancy, if any, between the endoscopist's estimate and pathologist's measurement of colonic polyp size. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 88 patients who underwent colonoscopy with a clear unequivocal documentation of polyp size by both the endoscopist and pathologist. Endoscopist measurements were based on the visual estimate of polyp size seen on high definition screens. The measurement was done by our pathologists after formalin fixation. We compared the endoscopist estimate of the polyp size to the pathologist measurement in order to explore the discordance between the two readings. Data regarding demographics and method of polypectomy(snare polypectomy vs excisional biopsy) was collected, as well. Statistical analysis software statistical software was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Our cohort included 88 patients from which 111 polyps were removed. Fifty-two(46.8%) of the 111 polyps were excised using biopsy forceps and fiftynine(53.2%) were removed by snare. In the biopsy forceps group, the mean polyp size documented by the pathologist was 0.38 ± 0.19 cm and the mean polyp size documented by the endoscopist was 0.54 ± 0.16cm. The mean difference was 0.15 cm(P < 0.001). In the snare group, the mean polyp size documented by the pathologist was 0.54 ± 0.24 cm and the mean polyp size documented by the endoscopist 0.97 ± 0.34 cm. The mean difference was 0.42 cm(P < 0.001). Combining both groups, the mean size documented by pathologist was 0.46 ± 0.23 cm compared to 0.76 ± 0.35 cm documented by the endoscopist. The mean difference was 0.3 cm(95%CI: 0.23-0.36).CONCLUSION: Post polypectomy measurement by the pathologist are generally smaller than the endoscopist's estimate.
