Skip to main content
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva : ABCD logoLink to Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva : ABCD
. 2014 Apr-Jun;27(2):109–113. doi: 10.1590/S0102-67202014000200006

INFLUENCE OF PATIENT AGE AND COLORECTAL POLYP SIZE ON HISTOPATHOLOGY FINDINGS

Influência da idade do paciente e do tamanho dos pólipos colorretais nos achados histopatológicos

Silvana Marques e SILVA 1,, Viviane Fernandes ROSA 1, Antônio Carlos Nóbrega dos SANTOS 1, Romulo Medeiros de ALMEIDA 1, Paulo Gonçalves de OLIVEIRA 1, João Batista de SOUSA 1
PMCID: PMC4678682  PMID: 25004288

Abstract

Background

Colorectal cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and can arise through the adenoma-carcinoma sequence. Colonoscopy is considered the method of choice for population-wide cancer screening.

Aim

To assess the characteristics of endoscopically resected polyps in a consecutive series of patients who underwent colonoscopy at a university hospital and compare histopathology findings according to patient age and polyp size.

Methods

Retrospective, cross-sectional of 1950 colonoscopy reports from consecutively examined patients. The sample was restricted to reports that mentioned colorectal polyps. A chart review was carried out for collection of demographic data and histopathology results. Data were compared for polyps sized ≤0.5 cm and ≥0.6 cm and then for polyps sized ≤1.0 cm and ≥1.1 cm. Finally, all polyps resected from patients aged 49 years or younger were compared with those resected from patients aged 50 years or older.

Results

A total of 272 colorectal polyps were resected in 224 of the 1950 colonoscopies included in the sample (11.5%). Polyps >1 cm tended to be pedunculated (p=0.000) and were more likely to exhibit an adenomatous component (p=0.001), a villous component (p=0.000), and dysplasia (p=0.003). These findings held true when the size cutoff was set at 0.5 cm. Patients aged 50 years or older were more likely to have sessile polyps (p=0.023) and polyps located in the proximal colon (p=0.009). There were no significant differences between groups in histopathology or presence of dysplasia.

Conclusion

Polyp size is associated with presence of adenomas, a villous component, and dysplasia, whereas patient age is more frequently associated with sessile polyps in the proximal colon.

Keywords: Colonoscopy, Polyps, Adenoma, Colon, Colorectal neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the fourth most common malignant neoplasm and the third leading cause of cancer mortality in Brazil1. The incidence is higher between the ages of 50 and 70.

It is widely known that 60-90% of this cancer arise from adenomas8, through the adenoma-carcinoma sequence. In the majority of cases, this transformation is relatively slow, taking up to 10-15 years8. This slow growth enables prevention of CRC by endoscopic resection of polyps.

In view of its prevalence, its long asymptomatic interval, and the presence of treatable precancerous lesions, CRC fulfills all criteria for routine population-wide screening. Colonoscopy is considered the method of choice for this purpose20. Randomized clinical trials and several cohort studies have shown that colonoscopic polypectomy reduces its incidence by 76-90%, as compared with a general population registry22,29.

Colorectal adenomas are the neoplasms most commonly detected during screening colonoscopy, as well as in diagnostic colonoscopy of symptomatic patients over the age of 5028. Adenomatous polyps may be classified as low-, moderate-, or high-risk lesions in terms of the risk of progression to cancer29. Lesions are considered advanced when they are ≥1 cm in size or exhibit a villous component or high-grade dysplasia26. Age is considered a risk factor for the presence of adenomas and dysplasia, the incidence of which increases once the sixth decade of life is reached23.

The objective of this study was to assess the characteristics of polyps resected endoscopically from a consecutive series of patients who underwent colonoscopy at a university hospital and compare histopathological findings by patient age and polyp size.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, cross-sectional, chart review study based on analysis of the reports of 1950 colonoscopies performed consecutively at the Coloproctology Service of Hospital Universitário de Brasília. The indications for colonoscopy were not taken into account. Reports were obtained from the hospital database. Only those that described evidence of polyps in the colon or rectum were considered for analysis. Patient charts were then reviewed to collect demographic data and the results of histopathological examination of resected specimens. Each polyp was analyzed individually, even when several were resected from the same patient.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease, colorectal malignancy, or genetic syndromes associated with polyposis were excluded from the sample, as were incomplete colonoscopies, polyps with malignant transformation, and unresected polyps.

Initially, the histopathological features of resected polyps were compared according to polyp size, defined as a dichotomous variable (≤0.5 cm or ≥0.6 cm as estimated by the endoscopist). A second analysis then compared ≤1.0 cm and ≥1.1 cm polyps. Finally, all polyps, regardless of size, resected from patients aged 49 years or younger were compared with those resected from patients aged 50 years or older.

Polyps located proximal to the splenic flexure of the colon were considered proximal, whereas those located after the splenic flexure were distal.

Statistical analyses were performed in the SPSS 17.0 software environment. Fisher's exact test was used for between-group comparisons. The significance level was set at p<0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 272 colorectal polyps were resected in 224 of the 1950 colonoscopies included in the sample (11.5%). Most of these colonoscopies had been performed in women (55.1%), and 75.9% of patients were aged 50 years or older.

Polyps were solitary in 51% of cases. In terms of morphology, 79.8% were sessile and 20.2 % were pedunculated (stalked). The most frequent site was the left colon (43.4%), followed by the right colon (20.6%), the transverse colon (17.6%), and the rectum (17.6%). Polyps were scattered throughout the colon in 7% of cases. Most polyps were <1 cm in size according to the examining physician (88.6%). The polyp size estimated by the endoscopist matched that determined by the pathologist in 80.1% of cases.

On histopathological examination, 42.6% of polyps were tubular adenomas, 2.9% were villous adenomas, 7% were tubulovillous adenomas, 23.2% were hyperplastic, 13% were inflammatory, and 4% were hamartomas. Other diagnoses were established in 7.3% of cases.

Comparison of polyps by size, using 1 cm as a cutoff, showed that larger polyps tended to be pedunculated (p=0.000) and were more likely to exhibit an adenomatous component (p=0.001) and dysplasia (p=0.003). There were no between-group differences in the distribution of polyp sites (p=0.677, Table 1).

TABLE 1.

Characteristics of resected polyps according to size (≤ 1 cm v ersus ≥1.1 cm)

Polyp characteristics Polyp size p
0 to 1 cm ≥1.1 cm
N % N %
Morphology Sessile 207 85.9 10 32.3 0.000
Pedunculated 34 14.1 21 67.7
Site Distal 148 61.4 20 64.5 0.845
Proximal 93 38.6 11 35.5
Histopathology Adenoma 118 48.9 25 80.6 0.001
Other 123 51.1 6 19.4
Dysplasia Present 115 47.7 25 80.6 0.003
Grade Low 105 43.6 17 54.7
  Moderate 10 4.1 7 22.6
  High 0 0 1 3.3
Absent 120 49.8 6 19.4
Indeterminate 6 2.5 0 0

Histopathology findings according to polyp size are described in Table 2. Only 10.7% of adenomas ≤1 cm in size had a villous component, versus 56% of those larger than 1 cm (p=0.000).

TABLE 2.

Histopathological features of resected polyps according to size (≤ 1 cm versus ≥1.1 cm)

Histopathology Polyp size
0 to 1 cm ≥1.1 cm
N % N %
Tubular adenoma 105 43.6 11 35.6
Villous adenoma 3 1.2 5 16.1
Tubulovillous adenoma 10 4.1 9 29.0
Hyperplastic polyp 59 24.5 4 12.9
Inflammatory polyp 36 15.0 1 3.2
Hamartoma 1 0.4 0 0
Normal mucosa 16 6.6 1 3.2
Other 11 4.6 0 0

Similar findings were observed when the size cutoff was set at 0.5 cm (Tables 3 and 4). Only 8.5% of adenomas ≤0.5 cm in size had a villous component, versus 57.6% of those 0.6 cm or larger (p=0.000).

TABLE 3.

Characteristics of resected polyps according to size (≤0.5 cm versus ≥0.6 cm)

Polyp characteristics Polyp size p
0 to 0.5 cm ≥0.6 cm
N % N %
Morphology Sessile 181 91.9 36 48.0 0.000
Pedunculated 16 8.1 39 52.0
Site Distal 120 60.9 48 64.0 0.677
Proximal 77 39.1 27 36.0
Histopathology Adenoma 92 46.7 51 68.0 0.002
Other 105 53.3 24 32.0
Dysplasia Present 91 46.2 49 65.3 0.003
Grade Low 86 43.7 36 48.0
  Moderate 5 2.5 12 16.0
  High 0 0 1 1.3
Absent 103 52.3 23 30.6
Indeterminate 3 1.5 3 4.1

TABLE 4.

Histopathological features of resected polyps according to size (≤0.5 cm versus ≥0.6 cm)

Histopathology Polyp size
0 to 0.5 cm ≥0.6 cm
N % N %
Tubular adenoma 84 42.7 32 42.7
Villous adenoma 3 1.5 5 6.7
Tubulovillous adenoma 5 2.5 14 18.6
Hyperplastic polyp 53 27.0 10 13.3
Inflammatory polyp 27 13.8 10 13.3
Hamartoma 1 0.5 0 0
Normal mucosa 15 7.5 2 2.7
Other 9 4.5 2 2.7

Comparison of polyp histopathology according to patient age showed that subjects aged 50 or older were more likely to have sessile polyps (p=0.023) located in the proximal colon (p=0.009). There were no significant age-related differences in histopathology or presence of dysplasia (Table 5).

TABLE 5.

Characteristics of resected polyps according to patient age

Polyp characteristics Patient age p
≥50 years ≤49 years
N % N %
Morphology Sessile 46 69.7 171 83.0 0.023
Pedunculated 20 30.3 35 17.0
Site Distal 50 75.7 118 57.3 0.009
Proximal 16 24.3 88 42.7
Histopathology Adenoma 28 42.4 115 55.8 0.066
Other 38 57.6 91 44.2
Dysplasia Present 27 40.9 113 54.9 0.102
Grade Low 21 31.9 101 49.0
  Moderate 6 9 11 5.4
  High 0 0 1 0.5
Absent 37 56.1 89 43.2
Indeterminate 2 3.0 4 1.9

Histopathological features according to patient age are described in Table 6. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the presence of a villous component (p=0.511).

TABLE 6.

Histopathological features of resected polyps according to patient age

Histopathology Patient age
≤49 years ≥50 years
N % N %
Tubular adenoma 23 34.8 93 45.1
Villous adenoma 2 3.0 6 2.9
Tubulovillous adenoma 3 4.6 16 7.8
Hyperplastic polyp 23 34.9 40 19.5
Inflammatory polyp 10 15.1 25 12.1
Hamartoma 0 0 1 0.5
Normal mucosa 3 4.6 14 6.8
Other 2 3.0 11 5.3

DISCUSSION

Colorectal polyps are common, being detected in up to 33% of colonoscopies9. Two-thirds of all colon polyps are adenomas, which, by definition, are dysplastic and have the potential for malignant transformation. Nearly all CRCs arise from adenomas, but only a small minority of adenomas will actually progress to cancer6.

The incidence of adenomatous polyps has been described as 21-28% in patients aged 50-59 years, 41-45% in the 60-69 age group, and 53-58% in patients over the age of 7014. The prevalence of adenomatous polyps on autopsy has been reported as 20-30%, and the incidence of these lesions appears to increase with age19. According to current ASGE/ACG recommendations, adenomas will be detected during first-ever colonoscopy in over 25% of asymptomatic men and 15% of asymptomatic women over the age of 5020.

The lower incidence of polyps in this study might be explained by the fact that the indication for colonoscopy was not taken into account, and that some of the colonoscopies included were performed under suboptimal bowel preparation conditions. The polyp detection rate depends on a host of variables, including the demographics of the screened population (age, sex, family history of CRS), the quality of bowel prep, endoscopist technique and expertise, and endoscope withdrawal time9.

Just over half of all polyps in this series (51%) were solitary. According to Lowenfels et al.12, approximately two-third of patients have solitary polyps, and the frequency of larger polyps increases with advancing age.

In this study, 91.9% of polyps <0.5 cm in size were sessile. Conversely, those larger than 1 cm were mostly pedunculated (67.7%). It is well known that polyps<5 mm, also known as minute polyps, are rarely stalked6.

Histopathological examination is accepted as the gold standard for definition of polyp size and has been recommended for clinical practice and research purposes alike5. In the present study, the polyp size estimated by the endoscopist at the time of resection matched the size later determined by the pathologist in 80.1% of cases. According to Schoen et al.24, polyp size is estimated inaccurately by the endoscopist in 20% of cases, with a trend toward overestimation. Conversely, other authors have concluded that endoscopists tend to underestimate lesion size15. In this study, polyp size was defined as that estimated by the endoscopist and noted in the colonoscopy report, so that histopathology findings could be interpreted from the point of view of the examining physician, who will be in charge of patient care and follow-up.

The histological features and size of adenomas are the most important determinants of malignant potential6. Adenomas may be classified as tubular, villous, or tubulovillous, according to their glandular architecture. Over 80% of colonic adenomas are tubular16.

Most polyps resected from the patients in this sample were ≤1 cm in size, left-sided, and had tubular adenoma as the predominant histopathological type, which corroborates previous findings26. However, in patients over the age of 50, polyps were most commonly located in the proximal colon. Prior studies have reported age as a major risk factor for proximal lesions11. Other authors, however, have found no age-related differences in polyp distribution17.

There was a higher incidence of adenoma and dysplasia in patients over the age of 50, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Other studies have reported a higher incidence of adenomas in general and advanced adenomas in particular after the fifth decade of life23,18. There were no significant between-group differences in presence of villous component. Villous polyps may become malignant in 29-70% of cases13. The presence of a villous component in endoscopically resected adenomas is a predictor of advanced lesions on follow-up colonoscopy28.

Winawer et al.29, in an analysis restricted to polyps ≥1 cm in diameter, found that 86% of adenomas exhibited slight atypia, 8% were moderately atypical, and 6% showed marked atypia, also known as carcinoma in situ. In the present study, 54.7% of polyps ≥1 cm were slightly dysplastic, 22.6% were moderately dysplastic, and 3.3% exhibited high-grade dysplasia.

One important finding of this study was the absence of any significant difference in histopathology features when the size cutoff for polyps was set at 0.5 cm or 1.0 cm. In both cases, increasing polyp size was associated with increased odds of adenoma, villous component, and dysplasia. Therefore, one may conclude that small (6-9 mm) polyps should not be neglected.

Few studies have assessed the rate of advanced histology on the basis of polyp size10. One such study concluded that removal of a greater number of polyps (including smaller polyps) with a lower rate of adenoma resection is preferable to removal of fewer polyps for a higher rate of adenoma resection3.

Kim et al.7 reported advanced histology in only 3% of polyps 6-9 mm in diameter. Other studies30 found evidence of a villous component in 4-15% and high-grade dysplasia in 4.3-5.8% of polyps in this size range. Lieberman et al.10 found a high proportion of advanced histology (prevalence up to 30.6%) in patients with polyps larger than 1 cm, whereas those with small (6-9 mm) polyps were at intermediate risk (6.6%), including of high-grade dysplasia (0.92%).

In another study27, which included patients aged 40-89 years, 18.7% of subjects had adenomas, 5% of which were advanced. The prevalence of advanced histology was 85% in polyps ≥1 cm, 27% in polyps 6-9 mm and 10% in polyps ≤5 mm in size. The authors concluded that failure to remove small polyps may place patients at risk of progression to advanced lesions and cancer.

Rex et al.21, in a retrospective study of 5079 patients, found advanced histology in 0.87% of minute (≤5 mm) polyps and 5.3% of small (6-9 mm) polyps. Chaput et al.2 found advanced histology in 4.7% of minute and 35.2% of small polyps, mostly due to presence of a villous component. The authors noted that polyp size <1 cm was associated with a higher incidence of advanced adenoma.

In a retrospective study of patients undergoing first-ever colonoscopy, Shapiro et al.25 found that 1.6% of polyps ≤5 mm exhibited high-great dysplasia or malignant transformation, and 4.1% contained a villous component. The rate of advanced histology for polyps 6-9 mm in size was over 15%. The authors concluded that expectant management of small polyps puts more than 5% of patients at risk of dysplasia progression.

In a systematic review by Hassan et al.4, advanced adenomas were identified in 5.6% of minute polyps, 7.9% of small polyps, and 87.5% of large (≥1 cm) polyps. The authors concluded that polypectomy of lesions larger than 6 mm identifies 95% of advanced adenomas. When resection is limited to polyps larger than 10 mm, only 88% of advanced lesions are identified.

CONCLUSION

Polyp size was associated with the presence of adenomatous and villous components and with dysplasia, whereas patient age was more frequently associated with sessile polyps located proximal to the splenic flexure.

Footnotes

Financial source: none

Conflicts of interest: none

REFERENCES

  • 1.Brazil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Atenção à Saúde . Estimativas 2008. Rio de Janeiro: INCA; 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Chaput U, Alberto SF, Terris B, Beuvon F, Audureau E, Coriat R, et al. Risk factors for advanced adenomas amongst small and diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective monocenter study. Dig Liver Dis. 2011 Aug;43(8):609–612. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2011.02.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Francis DL, Rodriguez-Correa DT, Buchner A, Harewood GC, Wallace M. Application of a conversion factor to estimate the adenoma detection rate from the polyp detection rate. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Mar;73(3):493–497. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Di Giulio E, Zullo A, Laghi A, et al. Systematic review: distribution of advanced neoplasia according to polyp size at screening colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Jan;31(2):210–217. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04160.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Hayes SJ. Assessment of colorectal adenomatous polyp size measured during pathological examination highlights the importance of accuracy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Sep;70(3):540–541. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.04.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hodadoostan MK, Reza F, Elham M, Mohammad Alizade AH, Molaie M, Mashaiekhy R, et al. Clinical and pathology characteristics of colorectal polyps in Iranian population. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2010;11(2):557–560. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ. Characteristics of advanced adenomas detected at CT colonographic screening: implications for appropriate polyp size thresholds for polypectomy versus surveillance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Apr;188(4):940–944. doi: 10.2214/AJR.06.0764. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kim EC, Lance P. Colorectal polyps and their relationship to cancer. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 1997 Mar;26(1):1–17. doi: 10.1016/s0889-8553(05)70280-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Lieberman DA, Faigel DO, Logan JR, Mattek N, Holub J, Eisen G, et al. Assessment of the quality of colonoscopy reports: results from a multicenter consortium. Pt 2Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3):645–653. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lieberman DA, Moravec M, Holub J, Michaels L, Eisen G. Polyp size and advanced histology in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening: implications for CT colonography. Gastroenterology. 2008 Oct;135(4):1100–1105. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.06.083. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lieberman DA, Prindiville S, Weiss DG, Willett W. Risk factors for advanced colonic neoplasia and hyperplastic polyps in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA. 2003 Dec 10;290(22):2959–2967. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.22.2959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lowenfels AB, Williams JL, Holub JL, Maisonneuve P, Lieberman DA. Determinants of polyp size in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. BMC Gastroenterol. 2011;11:101. doi: 10.1186/1471-230X-11-101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Loy TS, Kaplan PA. Villous adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum: a clinicopathologic study of 36 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004 Nov;28(11):1460–1465. doi: 10.1097/01.pas.0000141394.64707.02. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Markowitz AJ, Winawer SJ. Management of colorectal polyps. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997 Mar-Apr;47(2):93–112. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.47.2.93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Moug SJ, Vernall N, Saldanha J, McGregor JR, Balsitis M, Diament RH. Endoscopists' estimation of size should not determine surveillance of colonic polyps. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12(7):646–650. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01870.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.O'Brien MJ, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, Diaz B, et al. The National Polyp Study. Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology. 1990 Apr;98(2):371–379. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Okamoto M, Shiratori Y, Yamaji Y, Kato J, Ikenoue T, Togo G, et al. Relationship between age and site of colorectal cancer based on colonoscopy findings. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Apr;55(4):548–551. doi: 10.1067/mge.2002.122335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Petroianu A, Alberti LR, de Lima DC, Hauter HL, Rodrigues KC, Mendes JC. [Colonoscopic findings in asymptomatic people]. Arq Gastroenterol. 2009 Jul-Sep;46(3):173–178. doi: 10.1590/s0004-28032009000300006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pezzoli A, Matarese V, Rubini M, Simoni M, Caravelli GC, Stockbrugger R, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: results of a 5-year program in asymptomatic subjects at increased risk. Dig Liver Dis. 2007 Jan;39(1):33–39. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2006.09.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, Schoenfeld PS, Burke CA, Inadomi JM. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected] Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Mar;104(3):739–750. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.104. (Ger). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Rex DK, Overhiser AJ, Chen SC, Cummings OW, Ulbright TM. Estimation of impact of American College of Radiology recommendations on CT colonography reporting for resection of high-risk adenoma findings. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Jan;104(1):149–153. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2008.35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Rostirolla RA, Pereira-Lima JC, Teixeira CR, Schuch AW, Perazzoli C, Saul C. Development of colorectal advanced neoplasia/adenomas in the long-term follow-up of patients submitted to colonoscopy with polipectomy. Arq Gastroenterol. 2009 Jul-Sep;46(3):167–172. doi: 10.1590/s0004-28032009000300005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Rundle AG, Lebwohl B, Vogel R, Levine S, Neugut AI. Colonoscopic screening in average-risk individuals ages 40 to 49 vs 50 to 59 years. Gastroenterology. 2008 May;134(5):1311–1315. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.02.032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Schoen RE, Gerber LD, Margulies C. The pathologic measurement of polyp size is preferable to the endoscopic estimate. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997 Dec;46(6):492–496. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(97)70002-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Shapiro R, Ben-Horin S, Bar-Meir S, Avidan B. The risk of advanced histology in small-sized colonic polyps: are non-invasive colonic imaging modalities good enough? Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012 Feb 02; doi: 10.1007/s00384-012-1409-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Sousa Andrade C, Figueiredo P, Lopes S, Gouveia H, Sofia C, Correia Leitao M. [A thousand total colonoscopies: what is the relationship between distal and proximal findings?]. Acta Med Port. 2008 Sep-Oct;21(5):461–466. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Tsai FC, Strum WB. Prevalence of advanced adenomas in small and diminutive colon polyps using direct measurement of size. Dig Dis Sci. 2011 Aug;56(8):2384–2388. doi: 10.1007/s10620-011-1598-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Fletcher RH, Stillman JS, O'Brien M J, Levin B, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006 May-Jun;56(3):143-59; quiz 84-5. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.56.3.143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, O'Brien MJ, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med. 1993 Dec;329(27):1977–1981. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199312303292701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Yoo TW, Park DI, Kim YH, Kim HS, Kim WH, Kim TI, et al. Clinical significance of small colorectal adenoma less than 10 mm: the KASID study. Hepatogastroenterology. 2007 Mar;54(74):418–421. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian Archives of Digestive Surgery are provided here courtesy of Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva

RESOURCES