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
. 2025 Mar 18;9(3):e70113.
doi: 10.1002/jgh3.70113. eCollection 2025 Mar.

Dysplasia and Malignancy in Colonic Polyps: Preparing for a Resect and Discard Strategy in Canada

Affiliations

Dysplasia and Malignancy in Colonic Polyps: Preparing for a Resect and Discard Strategy in Canada

Vishesh V Patel et al. JGH Open. .

Abstract

Background/aims: Colonoscopies are commonly performed to evaluate and remove polyps. Currently, at most centers in Canada, all resected polyps are submitted for histologic examination. A resect and discard strategy has not been widely adopted in the Canadian population. The objective of this study was to characterize polyps and their rates of dysplasia.

Methods/results: Colonoscopies and pathology reports were analyzed at a tertiary care hospital. We recorded polyp size, histology, and the presence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/cancer. Out of a total of 2218 colonoscopies, 2945 polyps were removed. In descending order, tubular adenomas, hyperplastic, sessile serrated, tubulovillous, and inflammatory polyps represented 67.4%, 16.2%, 9.9%, 5.6%, and 0.8% of all polyps, respectively. Regarding size, 1703 polyps were between 1 and 5 mm, with only 2 (0.12%) showing HGD. Similarly, in the 6-9 mm group, there were 699 polyps, with only 3 (0.43%) showing HGD. Neither of these groups had evidence of cancer. In contrast, the > 10 mm group had 543 polyps, of which 87 (16.02%) showed HGD, and 15 (2.76%) exhibited cancer. In our patient population, only 0.04% of patients would have a change in their screening interval due to HGD in polyps that were < 5 mm in size.

Conclusions: Based on these findings, a resect and discard strategy should be further evaluated for diminutive polyps in this population. While current recommendations for post-polypectomy screening include pathological assessment, further research on screening intervals based on size, location, and optical diagnosis may reduce resource utilization without compromising outcomes.

Keywords: adenoma; colonoscopy; colorectal neoplasms; polyps.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Polyp size and dysplasia distribution.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Change in screening period due to HGD.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Future directions for resect and discard implementation in Canada.

Similar articles

References

    1. Brenner D., Weir H., Demers A., et al., “Projected Estimates of Cancer in Canada in 2020,” CMAJ 192, no. 9 (2020): E199–E205, 10.1503/cmaj.191292//DC1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marques Silva S., Fernandes Rosa V., Carlos Nóbrega dos Santos A., Medeiros de Almeida R., Gonçalves de Oliveira P., and Batista de Sousa J., “Influence of Patient Age and Colorectal Polyp Size on Histopathology Findings,” ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva 27, no. 1 (2014): 109–113. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lieberman D., Moravec M., Holub J., Michaels L., and Eisen G., “Polyp Size and Advanced Histology in Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy Screening: Implications for CT Colonography,” Gastroenterology 135, no. 4 (2008): 1100–1105, 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.06.083. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Orlovic M., Ahmad A., and Saunders B. P., “Economic Impact of Implementing Optical Diagnosis With a “Resect and Discard” Strategy Within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: Findings From the DISCARD3 Study,” Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 98, no. 1 (2023): 73–81, 10.1016/j.gie.2023.01.054. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hassan C., Pickhardt P. J., and Rex D. K., “A Resect and Discard Strategy Would Improve Cost‐Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening,” Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 8, no. 10 (2010): 865–869, 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.05.018. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources