Potential Factors Predicting Histopathologically Upgrade Discrepancies between Endoscopic Forceps Biopsy of the Colorectal Low-Grade Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Endoscopic Resection Specimens
Table 2
Baseline characteristics of the concordant group and the upgrade group disease after endoscopic resection.
Characteristics
Upgrade group ()
Concordant group ()
value
Age/y, median (IQR)
59 (48.75, 67)
58 (50, 65)
0.449
Female, (%)
69 (42.6)
263 (34.8)
0.061
Past medical history, (%)
HT
48 (29.6)
156 (20.6)
0.012
DM
21 (13.0)
71 (9.4)
0.170
NSAID
22 (13.6)
29 (3.8)
<0.001
Colorectal polyps
5 (3.1)
27 (3.6)
0.76
FAP
1 (0.6)
2 (0.3)
0.442
CRC
8 (4.9)
48 (6.3)
0.496
Lack of standardization of EFB number, (%)
102 (63.0)
217 (28.7)
0.001
EFB diagnosis, (%)
<0.001
Tubular
126 (77.8)
663 (87.7)
Tubulovillous
25 (15.4)
77 (10.2)
Villous
11 (6.8)
16 (2.1)
Postoperative pathological diagnosis, (%)
Tubular adenoma
—
712 (77.6)
Tubulovillous adenoma
—
34 (3.7)
Villous adenoma
—
10 (1.1)
HGD
114 (12.4)
—
Intramucosal carcinoma
33 (3.6)
—
Submucosal adenocarcinoma
10 (1.1)
—
Advanced adenocarcinoma
5 (0.5)
Maximum diameter of the target adenoma/cm, median (IQR)