Skip to main content
. 2020 May 28;74(1):48–52. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2020-206511

Table 3.

Results of all pathologist for phase II (n=39)

Pathologist Percentage of cases ‘indefinite for dysplasia’ Percentage agreement
(three categories)*
Consensus LGD and HGD cases underdiagnosed as NDBO (n (%)) n=23
Core pathologists
1 17.9 89.7 0
2 10.3 87.2 2 (8.7)
3 28.2 71.8 2 (8.7)
4 20.5 87.2 2 (8.7)
5 17.9 82.1 0
New core pathologists
B 7.7 74.4 2 (8.7)
E 25.6 69.2 1 (4.3)
J 12.8 71.8 1 (4.3)
New core pathologist after phase 1
F 33.3 61.5 1 (4.3)
Aspirant panel members
A 2.6 56.4 7 (30.4)
C 7.7 66.7 0
D 12.8 64.1 0
G 12.8 66.7 2 (8.7)
H 12.8 69.2 1 (4.3)
I 15.4 76.9 1 (4.3)
Benchmarkvalue† ≤38 ≥56 ≤3 (13)

dark grey, score does not fall within benchmark values

light grey, score falls within benchmark values

*NDBO/IND/LGD+HGD.

†Based on nine core pathologists.

HGD, high-grade dysplasia; IND, indefinite for dysplasia; LGD, low-grade dysplasia; NDBO, non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus.