A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Potential Factors Predicting Histopathologically Upgrade Discrepancies between Endoscopic Forceps Biopsy of the Colorectal Low-Grade Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Endoscopic Resection Specimens. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: It was gradually accepted that endoscopic fragment biopsy (EFB) diagnosis cannot accurately guarantee the absence of higher-grade neoplasms within the lesion of the digestive tract. There are no well-established predictors for histopathologically upgrade discrepancies between EFB diagnosing colorectal low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN) and endoscopic resection (ER) specimens.

Methods: A total of 918 colorectal LGINs was histopathologically diagnosed by EFB, including 162 cases with upgrade discrepancy and 756 concordant cases. We compared clinicopathological data of EFB and ER specimens between these two groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors for this upgrade histopathology.

Results: The predominant upgrade discrepancy of LGINs diagnosed by EFB was upgrades to high-grade dysplasia (114/918, 12.4%), followed by upgrades to intramucosal carcinoma (33/918, 3.6%), submucosal adenocarcinoma (10/918, 1.1%), and advanced adenocarcinoma (5/918, 0.5%). NSAID history (OR 4.83; 95% CI, 2.27-10.27; < 0.001), insufficient EFB number (OR 2.99; 95% CI, 1.91-4.68; < 0.001), maximum diameter ≥ 1.0 cm (OR 6.18; 95% CI, 1.32-28.99; = 0.021), lobulated shape (OR 2.68; 95% CI, 1.65-4.36; < 0.001), erythema (OR 2.42; 95% CI, 1.50-3.91; < 0.001), erosion (OR 7.12; 95% CI, 3.91-12.94; < 0.001), surface unevenness (OR 2.31; 95% CI, 1.33-4.01; = 0.003), and distal location of the target adenoma (OR 3.29; 95% CI, 1.68-6.41; < 0.001) were associated with the histologically upgrade discrepancies.

Conclusion: NSAID history, insufficient EFB number, adenoma size and location, and abnormal macroscopic patterns are potential predictors for upgrade histopathology of LGINs diagnosed by EFBs. The standardization of EFB number and advanced imaging techniques could minimize the risk of neglecting the potential of this upgrade histopathology.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9192244PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/1915458DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

efb number
12
upgrade
8
histopathologically upgrade
8
upgrade discrepancies
8
colorectal low-grade
8
low-grade intraepithelial
8
intraepithelial neoplasia
8
endoscopic resection
8
efb
8
diagnosed efb
8

Similar Publications