Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Jun;33(6):986-1006.
doi: 10.1038/s41379-019-0443-1. Epub 2020 Jan 6.

Pathological assessment of endoscopic resections of the gastrointestinal tract: a comprehensive clinicopathologic review

Affiliations
Free article
Review

Pathological assessment of endoscopic resections of the gastrointestinal tract: a comprehensive clinicopathologic review

M Priyanthi Kumarasinghe et al. Mod Pathol. 2020 Jun.
Free article

Erratum in

Abstract

Endoscopic resection (ER) allows optimal staging with potential cure of early-stage luminal malignancies while maintaining organ preservation. ER and surgery are non-competing but complementary therapeutic options. In addition, histological examination of ER specimens can either confirm or refine the pre-procedure diagnosis. ER is used for the treatment of Barrett's related early carcinomas and dysplasias, early-esophageal squamous cell carcinomas and dysplasias, early gastric carcinomas and dysplasia, as well as low-risk submucosal invasive carcinomas (LR-SMIC) and, large laterally spreading adenomas of the colon. For invasive lesions, histological risk factors predict risk of lymph node metastasis and residual disease at the ER site. Important pathological risk factors predictive of lymph node metastasis are depth of tumor invasion, poor differentiation, and lymphovascular invasion. Complete resection with negative margins is critical to avoid local recurrences. For non-invasive lesions, complete resection is curative. Therefore, a systematic approach for handling and assessing ER specimens is recommended to evaluate all above key prognostic features appropriately. Correct handling starts with pinning the specimen before fixation, meticulous macroscopic assessment with orientation of appropriate margins, systematic sectioning, and microscopic assessment of the entire specimen. Microscopic examination should be thorough for accurate assessment of all pathological risk factors and margin assessment. Site-specific issues such as duplication of muscularis mucosa of the esophagus, challenges of assessing ampullectomy specimens and site-specific differences of staging of early carcinomas throughout the gastrointestinal tract (GI) tract should be given special consideration. Finally, a standard, comprehensive pathology report that allows optimal staging with potential cure of early-stage malignancies or better stratification and guidance for additional treatment should be provided.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Shaheen NJ, Falk GW, Iyer PG, Gerson LB. ACG Clinical Guideline: diagnosis and management of Barrett’sesophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;108:1238–49.
    1. Whiteman DC, Appleyard M, Bahin FF, Bobryshev YV, Bourke MJ, Brown I, et al. Australian clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;30:804–20. - PubMed
    1. Weusten B, Bisschops R, Coron E, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Dumonceau JM, Esteban JM, et al. Endoscopic management of Barrett's esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy. 2017;49:191–8. - PubMed
    1. Fitzgerald RC, di Pietro M, Ragunath K, Ang Y, Kang JY, Watson P, et al. British Society of Gastroenterology Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2014;63:7–42. - PubMed
    1. Bergman JJ. How are we to justify endoscopic submucosal dissection in the Western world. Endoscopy. 2009;41:988–90. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources