Some diminutive colorectal polyps can be removed and discarded without pathological examination

Background and study aims: Pathological examination of colorectal polyps is useful if clinical management is affected (i. e. when invasive carcinoma is detected or postpolypectomy surveillance interval is guided). Our aim was to assess whether the pathological examination of some diminutive (measuring ≤ 5 mm) polyps can be omitted.

Patients and methods: Consecutive patients undergoing a colonoscopy at Pasteur Hospital (Colmar, France) between January and August 2008 were included in this prospective study. Six senior gastroenterologists predicted the future surveillance interval without referring to the result of pathological examination.

Results: In all, 350 polyps from 175 patients were removed and analyzed. The endoscopist was able to predict the correct surveillance interval without referring to the result of pathological examination in 118 patients (67.4 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 60.5 – 74.4). The pathological examination of 18.4 % (95 % CI 13.7 – 23.1) of diminutive polyps either associated with a cancer or a polyp measuring ≥ 10 mm or removed in very old or frail patients could be omitted without any consequence for the patient. If diminutive polyps one or two in number were discarded without pathological examination in patients with a personal history of colorectal neoplasm, three patients out of 43 would have a 5-year instead of a 3-year surveillance interval. As a whole, if 44.1 % (95 % CI 38.0 – 50.1) of diminutive polyps were discarded, the surveillance interval would remain identical in 98.3 % (95 % CI 96.4 – 100) of patients.

Conclusions: The pathological examination of up to 44 % of diminutive polyps (i. e. 33 % of all polyps), can be safely omitted. The pathological examination would be required only for those with suspicious gross appearance, those three or more in number, and those isolated one or two in number that are removed from people without personal history of colorectal neoplasm.

References

• 1 Atkin W S, Morson B C, Cuzick J. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas.  N Engl J Med. 1992;  326 658-662
• 2 Winawer S J, Zauber A G, Ho M N et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy.  N Engl J Med. 1993;  329 1977-1981
• 3 Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R et al. Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence.  Gut. 2001;  48 812-815
• 4 Külling D, Christ A D, Karaaslan N et al. Is histological investigation of polyps always necessary?.  Endoscopy. 2001;  33 428-432
• 5 Odom S R, Duffy S D, Barone J E et al. The rate of adenocarcinoma in endoscopically removed colorectal polyps.  Am Surg. 2005;  71 1024-1026
• 6 East J E, Saunders B P. Look, remove, and discard: can narrow-band imaging replace histopathology for small colorectal polyps? It is time to push the button!.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  66 953-956
• 7 Rex D K. Narrow-band imaging without optical magnification for histologic analysis of colorectal polyps.  Gastroenterology. 2009;  136 1174-1181
• 8 ANAES: French National Agency for Accreditation and Evaluation in Healthcare .Clinical practice guidelines. Indications for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (excluding population screening) Available at URL: www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c_272 348/indications-for-lower-gastrointestinal-endoscopy-excluding-population-screening. Last accessed: 14 October 2010. 
• 9 Hamilton S D, Vogelstein B, Kudo S et al. Tumours of the colon and rectum: Carcinoma of the colon and rectum.. In: World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Digestive System.. Lyon: IARC Press; 2000: 105-119
• 10 Snover D C, Jass J R, Fenoglio-Preiser C et al. Serrated polyps of the large intestine. A morphologic and molecular review of an evolving concept.  Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;  124 380-391
• 11 Schlemper R J, Kato Y, Stolte M. Diagnostic criteria for gastrointestinal carcinomas in Japan and Western countries: proposal for a new classification system of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia.  J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000;  15 G49-57
• 12 Dixon M F. Gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia: Vienna revisited.  Gut. 2002;  51 130-131
• 13 Sobin L, Gospodarowicz M K, Wittekind C. UICC, TNM classification of malignant tumors, 7th edn. New York: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009
• 14 Muto T, Bussey H JR, Morson B C. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum.  Cancer. 1975;  36 2251-2270
• 15 O’Brien M J, Winawer S J, Zauber A G et al. The National Polyp Study. Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas.  Gastroenterology. 1990;  98 371-379
• 16 Nusko G, Mansmann U, Partzsch U et al. Invasive carcinoma in colorectal adenomas: multivariate analysis of patient and adenoma characteristics.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 626-631
• 17 Matek W, Guggenmoos-Holzmann I, Demling L. Follow-up of patients with colorectal adenomas.  Endoscopy. 1985;  17 175-181
• 18 Weston A P, Campbell D R. Diminutive colonic polyps: histopathology, spatial distribution, concomitant significant lesions, and treatment complications.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1995;  90 24-28
• 19 Gschwantler M, Kriwanek S, Langner E et al. High-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma in colorectal adenomas: a multivariate analysis of the impact of adenoma and patient characteristics.  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2002;  14 183-188
• 20 Church J M. Clinical significance of small colorectal polyps.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;  47 481-485
• 21 Butterly L F, Chase M P, Pohl H et al. Prevalence of clinically important histology in small adenomas.  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;  4 343-348
• 22 Yoo T W, Park D I, Kim Y H et al. Clinical significance of small colorectal adenoma less than 10 mm: the KASID study.  Hepatogastroenterology. 2007;  54 418-421
• 23 Lieberman D, Moravec M, Holub J et al. Polyp size and advanced histology in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening: implications for CT colonography.  Gastroenterology. 2008;  135 1100-1105
• 24 Rex D K, Overhiser A J, Chen S C et al. Estimation of impact of American College of Radiology recommendations on CT colonography reporting for resection of high-risk adenoma findings.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;  104 149-153
• 25 Hurlstone D P, Cross S S, Lobo A J. A 1 mm depressed type IIc minute colorectal cancer: first reported case and discussion of clinical relevance, with special reference to endoscopic diagnosis.  J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003;  18 880-884
• 26 Konishi K, Kaneko K, Kurahashi T et al. A comparison of magnifying and non magnifying colonoscopy for diagnosis of colorectal polyps: a prospective study.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  57 48-53
• 27 Ignjatovic A, East J E, Suzuki N et al. Optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps at routine colonoscopy (Detect InSpect ChAracterise Resect and Discard; DISCARD trial): a prospective cohort study.  Lancet Oncol. 2009;  10 1171-1178
• 28 Van den Broek F JC, Reitsma J B, Curvers W L et al. Systematic review of narrow-band imaging for the detection and differentiation of neoplastic and nonneoplastic lesions in the colon.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;  69 124-135
• 29 Winawer S J, Zauber A G, Fletcher R H et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US multisociety task force on colorectal cancer and the american cancer society.  CA Cancer J Clin. 2006;  56 143-159
• 30 Appelman H D. Should HGD or degree of villous changes in colon polyps be reported? CON: high-grade dysplasia and villous features should not be part of the routine diagnosis of colorectal adenomas.  Am J Gastroentrol. 2008;  103 1329-1331
• 31 Odze R D. Should HGD or degree of villous changes in colon polyps be reported? A balancing view: pathologist-clinician interaction is essential.  Am J Gastroentrol. 2008;  103 1331-1333
• 32 Denis B, Peters C, Chapelain C et al. Diagnostic accuracy of community pathologists in the interpretation of colorectal polyps.  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;  21 1153-1160
• 33 Demers R Y, Neale A V, Budev H et al. Pathologist agreement in the interpretation of colorectal polyps.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1990;  85 417-421
• 34 Jensen P, Krogsgaard M R, Christiansen J et al. Observer variability in the assessment of type and dysplasia of colorectal adenomas, analyzed using Kappa statistics.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;  38 195-198
• 35 Rex D K, Alikhan M, Cummings O et al. Accuracy of pathologic interpretation of colorectal polyps by general pathologists in community practice.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  50 468-474
• 36 Yoon H, Martin A, Benamouzig R et al. Inter-observer agreement on histological diagnosis of colorectal polyps: the APACC study.  Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 2002;  26 220-224
• 37 Terry M B, Neugut A I, Bostick R M et al. Reliability in the classification of advanced colorectal adenomas.  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;  11 660-663
• 38 Costantini M, Sciallero S, Giannini A et al. Interobserver agreement in the histologic diagnosis of colorectal polyps: the experience of the multicenter adenoma colorectal study (SMAC).  J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;  56 209-214
• 39 Saini S D, Kim H M, Schoenfeld P. Incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy in patients with a personal history of colon adenomas: a meta-analysis and systematic review.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  64 614-626
• 40 Martinez M E, Baron J A, Liebermann D A et al. A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy.  Gastroenterology. 2009;  136 832-841
• 41 Atkin W S, Saunders B P. Surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomatous polyps.  Gut. 2002;  51 (Suppl. V) v6-v9
• 42 Schoen R E, Gerber L D, Margulies C. The pathologic measurement of polyp size is preferable to the endoscopic estimate.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;  46 492-496
• 43 Laiyemo A O, Murphy G, Albert P S et al. Postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance guidelines: predictive accuracy for advanced adenoma at 4 years.  Ann Intern Med. 2008;  148 419-426
• 44 Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler C M et al. Case-control study supports extension of surveillance interval after colonoscopic polypectomy to at least 5 Yr.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;  102 1739-1744
• 45 Schoenfeld P. Small and diminutive polyps: implications for colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography.  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;  4 293-295
• 46 Zalis M E, Barish M A, Choi J R et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal.  Radiology. 2005;  236 3-9
• 47 European Cancer Registries. Available at URL: http://213.169.175.103:5550947. Last accessed: 14 October 2010.