Endoscopic gastrointestinal biopsies: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m →Example normal reports: Stomach |
→Microscopic examination: +Reasons |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Microscopic examination== | ==Microscopic examination== | ||
{{Moderate-begin}}Read the endoscopy report before evaluating (except for polyp biopsies, where it can be presumed that the purpose is to look for | {{Moderate-begin}}Read the endoscopy report before evaluating (except for polyp biopsies, where it can be presumed that the purpose is to look for dysplasia).{{Moderate-end}}<ref group="note">'''Need to read endoscopy report''': If at least a short description of the indication is given in the order, the endoscopy report can be reviewed selectively, such as: | ||
*Suspected Barrett esophagus: Knowing the Prague classification, exact biopsy levels, and whether salmon-colored mucosa was seen helps correlate with intestinal metaplasia. | |||
*Inflammatory bowel disease: Distribution and endoscopic severity can help distinguish main conditions. | |||
*Masses or ulcers: Appearance (fungating, infiltrative, submucosal, healed ulcer) helps when biopsies are scant or nondiagnostic. | |||
*Microscopic colitis workup: Knowing that the colon appeared endoscopically normal supports the clinical context. | |||
*Discordant findings: For example, severe endoscopic esophagitis with minimal histologic changes, or vice versa. | |||
*Cases where the diagnosis affects staging or management: Such as EMRs/ESDs, dysplasia surveillance, unusual lesions or scant material. | |||
</ref> | |||
===Example normal reports=== | ===Example normal reports=== | ||
Further information in main articles of each location. | Further information in main articles of each location. | ||