ITEM VIEW

Hyperplastic polyp or sessile serrated lesion? the contribution of serial sections to reclassification

dc.contributor.authorJaravaza, Diana R.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorRigby, Jonathan M.en_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-06T09:34:09Z
dc.date.available2021-01-06T09:34:09Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationJaravaza, D. R. & Rigby, J. M. 2020. Hyperplastic polyp or sessile serrated lesion? the contribution of serial sections to reclassification. Diagnostic Pathology, 15:140, doi:10.1186/s13000-020-01057-0
dc.identifier.issn1746-1596 (online)
dc.identifier.otherdoi:10.1186/s13000-020-01057-0
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/108980
dc.descriptionCITATION: Jaravaza, D. R. & Rigby, J. M. 2020. Hyperplastic polyp or sessile serrated lesion? the contribution of serial sections to reclassification. Diagnostic Pathology, 15:140, doi:10.1186/s13000-020-01057-0.
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at https://diagnosticpathology.biomedcentral.com
dc.descriptionPublication of this article was funded by the Stellenbosch University Open Access Fund
dc.description.abstractBackground: The histological discrimination of hyperplastic polyps from sessile serrated lesions can be difficult. Sessile serrated lesions and hyperplastic polyps are types of serrated polyps which confer different malignancy risks, and surveillance intervals, and are sometimes difficult to discriminate. Our aim was to reclassify previously diagnosed hyperplastic polyps as sessile serrated lesions or confirmed hyperplastic polyps, using additional serial sections. Methods: Clinicopathological data for all colorectal hyperplastic polyps diagnosed in 2016 and 2017 was collected. The slides were reviewed and classified as hyperplastic polyps, sessile serrated lesion, or other, using current World Health Organization criteria. Eight additional serial sections were performed for the confirmed hyperplastic polyp group and reviewed. Results: Of an initial 147 hyperplastic polyps from 93 patients, 9 (6.1%) were classified as sessile serrated lesions, 103 as hyperplastic polyps, and 35 as other. Of the 103 confirmed hyperplastic polyps, 7 (6.8%) were proximal, and 8 (7.8%) had a largest fragment size of ≥5mm and < 10 mm. After 8 additional serial sections, 11 (10.7%) were reclassified as sessile serrated lesions. They were all less than 5mm and represented 14.3% of proximal polyps and 10.4% of distal polyps. An average of 3.6 serial sections were required for a change in diagnosis. Conclusion: Histopathological distinction between hyperplastic polyps and sessile serrated lesions remains a challenge. This study has uncovered a potential role for the use of additional serial sections in the morphological reappraisal of small hyperplastic polyps, especially when proximally located.en_ZA
dc.description.urihttps://diagnosticpathology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13000-020-01057-0
dc.format.extent9 pagesen_ZA
dc.language.isoen_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherBMC (part of Springer Nature)en_ZA
dc.subjectSessile serrated lesionen_ZA
dc.subjectAdenomaen_ZA
dc.subjectPolyps (Pathology)en_ZA
dc.titleHyperplastic polyp or sessile serrated lesion? the contribution of serial sections to reclassificationen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
dc.description.versionPublisher's version
dc.rights.holderAuthors retain copyrighten_ZA


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

ITEM VIEW