Endoscopic small-capacity forceps increase the pathological diagnosis of gastric indefinite neoplasia
- PMID: 30249564
- PMCID: PMC6284649
- DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2018.17347
Endoscopic small-capacity forceps increase the pathological diagnosis of gastric indefinite neoplasia
Abstract
Background/aims: A definitive biopsy-based diagnosis of gastric cancer is sometimes difficult, and some cases are pathologically diagnosed as gastric indefinite neoplasia (GIN). The most appropriate forceps size for gastric biopsy has yet to be determined. In this study, we investigated the relation between the forceps size and the frequency of GIN diagnosis.
Materials and methods: The records of patients from two historical groups were reviewed. The first group comprised patients evaluated during the period when standard biopsy forceps (StF) were used (April 2010-March 2011), and the second group comprised patients evaluated during the period when small biopsy forceps (SmF) were used (April 2011-March 2013). Patients in whom GIN lesions were diagnosed with biopsy were identified, and pertinent data were compared between the two groups of patients.
Results: Among the 8,420 patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) during the first period, 2,584 (30.7%) underwent gastric biopsy with StF. Among the 15,968 patients who underwent EGD during the second period, 4,204 (26.3%) underwent gastric biopsy with SmF. GIN was diagnosed in a significantly greater number of patients in the SmF group than in the StF group (52 [1.25%] vs. 19 [0.73%]; p=0.048). The mean minor-axis lengths of the biopsy samples were 1.50±0.50 mm and 1.38±0.40 mm in the StF group and the SmF group, respectively, with the SmF group samples tending to be shorter (p=0.088).
Conclusion: Because the SmF use may increase the rate of GIN diagnosis, the use of SmF with a standard-caliber endoscope should be avoided.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures



Similar articles
-
Risk factors for under-diagnosis of gastric intraepithelial neoplasia and early gastric carcinoma in endoscopic forceps biopsy in comparison with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Chinese patients.Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):2716-22. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4534-x. Epub 2015 Sep 30. Surg Endosc. 2016. PMID: 26423416
-
Biopsy specimens obtained with small-caliber endoscopes have comparable diagnostic performances than those obtained with conventional endoscopes: a prospective study on 1335 specimens.J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010 Jan;44(1):12-7. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e3181a1bebd. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010. PMID: 19661817 Clinical Trial.
-
Early-stage gastric cancers represented as dysplasia in a previous forceps biopsy: the importance of clinical management.Dig Liver Dis. 2013 Feb;45(2):170-5. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2012.09.008. Epub 2012 Oct 24. Dig Liver Dis. 2013. PMID: 23102499
-
Non-endoscopic biopsy techniques: a review.Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Feb;12(2):109-117. doi: 10.1080/17474124.2018.1412828. Epub 2017 Dec 15. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018. PMID: 29241376 Review.
-
Location, size, and distance: criteria for quality in esophagogastroduodenos copy reporting for pre-operative gastric cancer evaluation.Surg Endosc. 2014 May;28(5):1660-7. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3367-8. Epub 2014 Jan 23. Surg Endosc. 2014. PMID: 24452290 Review.
Cited by
-
Combination of artificial intelligence-based endoscopy and miR148a methylation for gastric indefinite dysplasia diagnosis.J Clin Lab Anal. 2022 Jan;36(1):e24122. doi: 10.1002/jcla.24122. Epub 2021 Nov 22. J Clin Lab Anal. 2022. PMID: 34811809 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous