Efficacy of the revised Vienna Classification for diagnosing colorectal epithelial neoplasias - PubMed (original) (raw)

Efficacy of the revised Vienna Classification for diagnosing colorectal epithelial neoplasias

Kenji Tominaga et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2009.

Abstract

Aim: To prospectively investigate the efficacy of the revised Vienna Classification for diagnosing colorectal epithelial neoplastic lesions in cold biopsy specimens.

Methods: Patients were selected for inclusion if they had colorectal epithelial lesions that were not considered suitable for direct endoscopic resection. These included colorectal polyps > or = 10 mm and lesions suspected of being carcinomas capable of invading the colorectal submucosa or beyond, including strictures, based on the cold biopsies obtained from each lesion prior to resection. We investigated the relationship between diagnoses based on cold biopsy samples using the revised Vienna Classification and resected specimens of the same lesions, and the therapeutic implications of diagnoses made using the revised Vienna Classification. The same cold biopsy specimens were also examined using the Japanese Group Classification guidelines, and compared with the resected specimens of the same lesions for reference.

Results: A total of 179 lesions were identified. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the revised Vienna Classification for distinguishing between intramucosal lesions and submucosal invasive carcinomas in cold biopsy specimens was 22.2%, 100%, 100%, and 71.4%, respectively, and for distinguishing between intramucosal lesions and those invading the submucosa or beyond was 59.7%, 100%, 100%, and 37.6%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the Japanese Group Classification for distinguishing between intramucosal lesions and submucosal invasive carcinomas in cold biopsy specimens was 83.3%, 91.4%, 83.3%, and 91.4%, respectively, and for distinguishing between intramucosal lesions and those invading the submucosa or beyond was 95.1%, 91.4%, 97.9%, and 82.1%, respectively. A total of 137 of 144 carcinomas that had invaded the submucosa or beyond and three high-grade intraepithelial neoplasias were diagnosed as "carcinoma" using the Japanese Group Classification system.

Conclusion: The revised Vienna Classification for cold biopsy specimens has high positive predictive value in the diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma invasive to the submucosa or beyond.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Predictive value of magnification chromoendoscopy for diagnosing invasive neoplasia in nonpolypoid colorectal lesions and stratifying patients for endoscopic resection or surgery.
  Bianco MA, Rotondano G, Marmo R, Garofano ML, Piscopo R, de Gregorio A, Baron L, Orsini L, Cipolletta L. Bianco MA, et al. Endoscopy. 2006 May;38(5):470-6. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-925399. Endoscopy. 2006. PMID: 16767581
• Endoscopic features and clinical course of colorectal carcinoma resected by cold snare polypectomy.
  Yoshii S, Hayashi Y, Nakamura T, Nishiyama O, Nagaike K, Nakamatsu D, Yamada T, Egawa S, Ogiyama H, Yamaguchi S, Inoue T, Uema R, Kato M, Inoue T, Tsujii Y, Shinzaki S, Iijima H, Michida T, Morii E, Takehara T. Yoshii S, et al. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Jun;38(6):948-954. doi: 10.1111/jgh.16145. Epub 2023 Feb 24. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023. PMID: 36797208 Review.
• The Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia.
  Schlemper RJ, Riddell RH, Kato Y, Borchard F, Cooper HS, Dawsey SM, Dixon MF, Fenoglio-Preiser CM, Fléjou JF, Geboes K, Hattori T, Hirota T, Itabashi M, Iwafuchi M, Iwashita A, Kim YI, Kirchner T, Klimpfinger M, Koike M, Lauwers GY, Lewin KJ, Oberhuber G, Offner F, Price AB, Rubio CA, Shimizu M, Shimoda T, Sipponen P, Solcia E, Stolte M, Watanabe H, Yamabe H. Schlemper RJ, et al. Gut. 2000 Aug;47(2):251-5. doi: 10.1136/gut.47.2.251. Gut. 2000. PMID: 10896917 Free PMC article.
• [Endoscopic Submucosal dissection and mucosectomy for the treatment of the epithelial neoplasia and early gastric cancer].
  Barreda B F, Sanchez L J. Barreda B F, et al. Rev Gastroenterol Peru. 2008 Oct-Dec;28(4):332-55. Rev Gastroenterol Peru. 2008. PMID: 19156178 Spanish.

Cited by

• Recurrence and survival in dogs with excised colorectal polyps: A retrospective study of 58 cases.
  Méric T, Issard J, Maufras T, Hugonnard M, Senecat O, Lecoindre A, Leal RO, Bertolani C, Toulza O, Lecoindre P, Brisebard E, Ledevin M, Larcher T, Drut A, Darnis E, Hernandez J. Méric T, et al. J Vet Intern Med. 2023 Nov-Dec;37(6):2375-2384. doi: 10.1111/jvim.16876. Epub 2023 Sep 29. J Vet Intern Med. 2023. PMID: 37772917 Free PMC article.
• Improving quality control in the routine practice for histopathological interpretation of gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsies using artificial intelligence.
  Ko YS, Choi YM, Kim M, Park Y, Ashraf M, Quiñones Robles WR, Kim MJ, Jang J, Yun S, Hwang Y, Jang H, Yi MY. Ko YS, et al. PLoS One. 2022 Dec 15;17(12):e0278542. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278542. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 36520777 Free PMC article.
• A new practical classification of desmoplastic reaction in endoscopic forceps biopsy of colorectal cancer.
  Jing H, Shang L, Zhao S, Yao Z, Lv B, Zhu X. Jing H, et al. Histol Histopathol. 2021 Jul;36(7):765-773. doi: 10.14670/HH-18-353. Epub 2021 Jun 15. Histol Histopathol. 2021. PMID: 34132383
• Histopathologic discrepancy between endoscopic forceps biopsy and final pathology and the role of transrectal ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy.
  Roh J, Noh CK. Roh J, et al. Ann Transl Med. 2020 Feb;8(4):65. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.12.52. Ann Transl Med. 2020. PMID: 32175358 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• Diagnostic value, safety, and histopathologic discrepancy risk factors for endoscopic forceps biopsy and transrectal ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy in rectum lesions.
  Liu M, Lu ZH, Wang QX, Zheng W, Pei XQ, Han F, Zhou JH, Lin X, Wan DS, Li AH. Liu M, et al. Ann Transl Med. 2019 Nov;7(21):607. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.09.30. Ann Transl Med. 2019. PMID: 32047768 Free PMC article.

References

1. 1. Schlemper RJ, Itabashi M, Kato Y, Lewin KJ, Riddell RH, Shimoda T, Sipponen P, Stolte M, Watanabe H. Differences in the diagnostic criteria used by Japanese and Western pathologists to diagnose colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 1998;82:60–69. - PubMed
2. 1. Schlemper RJ, 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 Suppl:G49–G57. - PubMed
3. 1. Dixon MF. Gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia: Vienna revisited. Gut. 2002;51:130–131. - PMC - PubMed
4. 1. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum. Response assessment of nonsurgical treatment for colorectal carcinoma. Japanese classification of colorectal carcinoma. 1st English ed. Tokyo: Kanehara & Co Ltd; 1997. pp. 77–82.
5. 1. Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer. 1975;36:2251–2270. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

• Full Text Sources

  • Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
  • Europe PubMed Central
  • PubMed Central

• Medical

  • MedlinePlus Health Information