THE IMPORTANCE OF MORPHOLOGICAL-CLINICAL CONSISTENCY: THROUGH THE REVIEW OF GASTRIC BIOPSIES IN NORTH-EASTERN ANATOLIA REGION IN TURKEY

Year 2018, Volume: 19 Issue: 4, 135 - 138, 26.10.2018

Rabia Demirtaş Şenay Erdoğan Durmuş Enver Yarıkkaya

https://doi.org/10.18229/kocatepetip.474995

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In our study we aimed to make a generally

review of gastric biyopsies in North-Eastern Anatolia

region in Turkey such as; percentages of malignancy or

dysplasia, reasons of re-biopsy recommendations and

results of second biopsies if taken.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: 1840 gastric biopsies which

examined by 3 pathologists at 2 centers were analyzed

retrospectively. Percentages of malignancy or dysplasia,

cases which were recommended for re-biopsies, reasons

of recommendations and results of re-biopsies were

examined. In the results of the second biopsies, dysplasia,

malignancy and gastritis were accepted as a significant

result.

RESULTS: The mean age of our cases was 52.9 ± 16.6 years

(range: 18-95 years). 1012 (55%) patients were females

and 828 (45%) patients were males. In 90 out of 1840

cases, biopsies were taken for suspect of malignancy,

clinically. 35 of 90 cases were reported as malignancy. In

61 out of 1840 cases re-biopsy were recommended. Reasons

of recommendations for re-biopsy categorized in

three groups: suspect of malignancy- clinically, suspect

of malignancy- morphologically, insufficient (superficial)

biopsies. 12 (46.2%) of 26 cases which were taken second

biopsies were reported as malignancy and gastric

dysplasia. Only in 2 (7.6%) of 26 cases the results were

insignificant (insufficient biopsy).

CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic findings provide information

about the diagnosis but are not pathognomonic

which also need histological confirmation. Close

working relationship and a good dialogue between the

pathologist and the gastroenterologist is essential for

clinical-morpological consistency, morphological-clinical

consistency and final diagnosis.

Keywords

Gastric biopsies, Malignancy, biopsies

TÜRKİYE’DE KUZEY-DOĞU ANADOLU BÖLGESİNDEKİ MİDE BİYOPSİLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ İLE: MORFOLOJİK-KLİNİK UYUMUN ÖNEMİ

Abstract

AMAÇ: Çalışmamızda Türkiye'deki Kuzey-Doğu Anadolu

bölgesindeki gastrik biyopsileri genel olarak gözden

geçirmeyi amaçladık; malignite veya displazi yüzdeleri,

biyopsi tekrarı önerilerinin nedenleri ve alınmışsa ikinci

biyopsi sonuçları gibi.

GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: İki merkezde 3 patolog tarafından

incelenen 1840 gastrik biyopsi geriye dönük olarak incelendi.

Malignite veya displazi yüzdeleri, biyopsi tekrarı

önerilen vakalar, önerilerin nedenleri ve yeniden alınan

biyopsilerin sonuçları incelendi. İkinci biyopsi sonuçlarında

displazi, malignite ve gastrit anlamlı sonuç olarak

kabul edildi.

BULGULAR: Olgularımızın yaş ortalaması 52.9 ± 16.6

yıl (18-95 yıl) idi. 1012 hasta (% 55) kadın, 828 hasta (%

45) erkekti. 1840 vakanın 90'ında, klinik olarak malignite

şüphesi için biyopsi alındı. Bu olguların 35'i malignite

olarak raporlandı. 1840 vakanın 61'ine biyopsi tekrarı

önerildi. Yeniden biyopsi tavsiyelerinin sebepleri

malignite şüphesi - klinik, malignite şüphesi - morfolojik

ve yetersiz (yüzeyel) biyopsiler olarak üç gruba ayrıldı.

İkinci biyopsi alınan 26 olgunun 12 'si (% 46.2) malignite

ve gastrik displazi olarak bildirildi. 26 olgunun sadece

2'sinde (% 7.6) sonuç anlamlı değildi (yetersiz biyopsi).

SONUÇ: Endoskopik bulgular tanı hakkında bilgi

sağlarken, patognomonik değildir ve histolojik olarak

onaylanması gerekir. Patolog ve gastroenterolog

arasındaki iyi bir diyalog ve yakın çalışma ilişkisi, klinikmorfolojik

tutarlılık, morfolojik-klinik tutarlılık ve nihai

teşhis için önemlidir.

Keywords

Gastrik biyopsiler, Malignite, Biyopsi tekrarı

References

• 1. Niknam R, Manafi A, Fattahi MR, Mahmoudi L. The association between gastric endoscopic findings and histologic premalignant lesions in the Iranian rural population. Medicine (Baltimore) 2015;94: e715.
• 2. Fock KM. Review article: the epidemiology and prevention of gastric cancer. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2014;40:250–260.
• 3. Yuyucu Karabulut Y, Bozdoğan Arpaci R, Dölek Y, Topal F. What is the consistency between the diagnoses of endoscopists and pathologists concerning malignant lesions of the gastrointestinal tract? Endoscopy Gastrointestinal 2014;22:53- 6.
• 4. Al Hamdani A, Fayadh HM, Abdul Majeed BA. Helicobacter pylori gastritis: correlation between endoscopic and histological findings. IJGE 2001;1:43-8.
• 5. Kasap E, Güngör G, Aygör E, et al. What is the consistency between the diagnoses of endoscopists and pathologists concerning gastroduodenal mucosa? Endoscopy 2012;20:13-6.
• 6. Irkorucu O, Gultekin FA, Ucan BH, et al. Agreement Between Pathologic Diagnosis and Endoscopic Findings on Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Performed by General Surgeons. Med Bull Haseki 2011;49:26–9.
• 7. Sharma S, Makaju R, Dhakal R, et al. Correlation between Endoscopic and Histopathological Findings in Gastric Lesions. Kathmandu Univ Med 2015;51:216-9.
• 8. Pailoor K, Sarpangala MK. Histopathological diagnosis of gastric biopsies in correlation with endoscopy- A study in a tertiary care center. Adv Lab Med Int 2012;3:22-31.
• 9. Redeen S, Petersson F, Jonsson KA, Borch K. Relationship of gastroscopic features to histological findings in gastritis and Helicobacter pylori infection in a general population sample. Endoscopy 2003;35:946–50.
• 10. Eshmuratov A, Nah JC, Kim N, et al. The correlation of endoscopic and histological diagnosis of gastric atrophy. Dig
• 11. Lim JH, Kim N, Lee HS, et al. Correlation between Endoscopic and Histological Diagnoses of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia. Gut Liver 2013;7:41–50.
• 12. Carr NJ, Leadbetter H, Marriott A. Correlation between the endoscopic and histologic diagnosis of gastritis. Ann Diagn Pathol 2012;16:13–5.
• 13. Sheiko MA, Feinstein JA, Capocelli KE, Kramer RE. The concordance of endoscopic and histologic findings of 1000 pediatric EGDs. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;81:1385-91.