Background and AimsTo compare endoscopy and pathology sizing in a large population-based series of colorectal adenomas and to evaluate the implications for patient stratification into surveillance colonoscopy.MethodsEndoscopy and pathology sizes available from intact adenomas removed at colonoscopies performed as part of the Northern Ireland Bowel Cancer Screening Programme, from 2010 to 2015, were included in this study. Chi-squared tests were applied to compare size categories in relation to clinicopathological parameters and colonoscopy surveillance strata according to current American Gastroenterology Association and British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines.ResultsA total of 2521 adenomas from 1467 individuals were included. There was a trend toward larger endoscopy than pathology sizing in 4 of the 5 study centers, but overall sizing concordance was good. Significantly greater clustering with sizing to the nearest 5 mm was evident in endoscopy versus pathology sizing (30% vs 19%, p<0.001), which may result in lower accuracy. Applying a 10-mm cut-off relevant to guidelines on risk stratification, 7.3% of all adenomas and 28.3% of those 8 to 12 mm in size had discordant endoscopy and pathology size categorization. Depending upon which guidelines are applied, 4.8% to 9.1% of individuals had differing risk stratification for surveillance recommendations, with the use of pathology sizing resulting in marginally fewer recommended surveillance colonoscopies.ConclusionsChoice of pathology or endoscopy approaches to determine adenoma size will potentially influence surveillance colonoscopy follow-up in 4.8% to 9.1% of individuals. Pathology sizing appears more accurate than endoscopy sizing, and preferential use of pathology size would result in a small, but clinically important, decreased burden on surveillance colonoscopy demand. Careful endoscopy sizing is required for adenomas removed piecemeal.
FingerprintDive into the research topics of 'A comparison of endoscopy versus pathology sizing of colorectal adenomas and potential implications for surveillance colonoscopy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.