Dysplasia in Gastric Mucosa and its Reporting Problems
| Autor: | Dhurata Tarifa, Blerina Cela, Majlinda Ikonomi |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2015 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
interobserver variability lcsh:Medicine Malignancy Negative for Neoplasia Gastroenterology Basic Science dysplasia Internal medicine Metaplasia Pathology Medicine Suspicious for Malignancy business.industry gastric cancer lcsh:R gastric dysplasia General Medicine medicine.disease Dermatology neoplasia Gastric Dysplasia Dysplasia Histopathology Gastritis medicine.symptom business |
| Zdroj: | Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences; Vol 3, No 4 (2015): Dec 15 (OAMJMS); 551-557 Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol 3, Iss 4, Pp 551-557 (2015) Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences; Vol. 3 No. 4 (2015): Dec 15 (OAMJMS); 551-557 |
| ISSN: | 1857-9655 |
| Popis: | BACKGROUND: The recognition, terminology used and histopathologic evaluation of two essential elements in gastric carcinogenesis, atrophy and dysplasia, are characterized by controversy.MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred fifteen cases, with slides and their histopathologic reports from the archive of the Laboratory of Pathology were studied for the diagnostic value, reporting of dysplasia, interobserver variability, the relation of dysplastic lesions with inflammation, atrophy and metaplasia. After retrospectively studying the histopathologic reports from the archive we distributed the cases according to endoscopic and histopathologic diagnosis, together with the reexamination of the slides. The comparison of the median values of the numeric variables was made with the Mann-Whitney test (non-parametric equivalent of the Student’s “t†test).RESULTS: The endoscopic clinical diagnosis were: malignancy/suspicious for malignancy 88 cases (76%) and non-neoplastic diagnosis (like ulcer or gastritis) 27 cases (24%). From the reexamination of the cases it resulted that there is no difference in reporting the malignancy, but there is a difference in the cases reported as dysplasia (p = 0.001) and negative for neoplasia (p = 0.063, borderline).CONCLUSION: Clinicians and pathologists can feel directly the discrepancy called “interobserver variability†and should be assured that the use of guidelines will cause a lowering of this variability. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|