Difference between revisions of "Gastrointestinal tract polyps"

#"Negative for high-grade dysplasia" is recommended in the Canadian consensus;<ref name=driman>{{cite journal | last1 = Driman | first1 = DK. | last2 = Marcus | first2 = VA. | last3 = Hilsden | first3 = RJ | last4 = Owen | first4 = DA |title=Pathologic reporting of colorectal polyps: pan-Canadian consensus guidelines |journal=Canadian Journal of Pathology |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=81-90 |year=2012 |month= |pmid= |doi= |url= }}</ref> the reasoning is that "with low-grade dysplasia" may lead to over treatment by physicians that are not aware that all (traditional) adenomas have low-grade dysplasia.

#The phrase "negative for malignancy" is also recommended in the Canadian consensus.<ref name=driman>{{cite journal | last1 = Driman | first1 = DK. | last2 = Marcus | first2 = VA. | last3 = Hilsden | first3 = RJ | last4 = Owen | first4 = DA |title=Pathologic reporting of colorectal polyps: pan-Canadian consensus guidelines |journal=Canadian Journal of Pathology |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=81-90 |year=2012 |month= |pmid= |doi= |url= }}</ref> This doesn't make sense to VL, as one very frequently does not get submucosa.  It is like reporting "negative for submucosal invasion" on gastric biopsies.