Interobserver reproducibility in pathologist interpretation of columnar-lined esophagus

Luca Mastracci, Nataniele Piol, Luca Molinaro, Francesca Pitto, Carmine Tinelli, Annalisa De Silvestri, Roberto Fiocca, Federica Grillo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Confirmation of endoscopically suspected esophageal metaplasia (ESEM) requires histology, but confusion in the histological definition of columnar-lined esophagus (CLE) is a longstanding problem. The aim of this study is to evaluate interpathologist variability in the interpretation of CLE. Thirty pathologists were invited to review three ten-case sets of CLE biopsies. In the first set, the cases were provided with descriptive endoscopy only; in the second and the third sets, ESEM extent using Prague criteria was provided. Moreover, participants were required to refer to a diagnostic chart for evaluation of the third set. Agreement was statistically assessed using Randolph’s free-marginal multirater kappa. While substantial agreement in recognizing columnar epithelium (K = 0.76) was recorded, the overall concordance in clinico-pathological diagnosis was low (K = 0.38). The overall concordance rate improved from the first (K = 0.27) to the second (K = 0.40) and third step (K = 0.46). Agreement was substantial when diagnosing Barrett’s esophagus (BE) with intestinal metaplasia or inlet patch (K = 0.65 and K = 0.89), respectively, in the third step, while major problems in interpretation of CLE were observed when only cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium was present (K = 0.05–0.29). In conclusion, precise endoscopic description and the use of a diagnostic chart increased consistency in CLE interpretation of esophageal biopsies. Agreement was substantial for some diagnostic categories (BE with intestinal metaplasia and inlet patch) with a well-defined clinical profile. Interpretation of cases with cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium, with or without ESEM, was least consistent, which reflects lack of clarity of definition and results in variable management of this entity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)159-167
Number of pages9
JournalVirchows Archiv
Volume468
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 1 2016

Fingerprint

Metaplasia
Cardia
Esophagus
Barrett Esophagus
Epithelium
Biopsy
Endoscopy
Histology
Pathologists

Keywords

  • Barrett’s esophagus
  • Columnar-lined esophagus
  • Histological diagnosis
  • Interobserver variation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Cell Biology
  • Molecular Biology

Cite this

Interobserver reproducibility in pathologist interpretation of columnar-lined esophagus. / Mastracci, Luca; Piol, Nataniele; Molinaro, Luca; Pitto, Francesca; Tinelli, Carmine; De Silvestri, Annalisa; Fiocca, Roberto; Grillo, Federica.

In: Virchows Archiv, Vol. 468, No. 2, 01.02.2016, p. 159-167.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b3052165c10047bab5381dc37580259c,
title = "Interobserver reproducibility in pathologist interpretation of columnar-lined esophagus",
abstract = "Confirmation of endoscopically suspected esophageal metaplasia (ESEM) requires histology, but confusion in the histological definition of columnar-lined esophagus (CLE) is a longstanding problem. The aim of this study is to evaluate interpathologist variability in the interpretation of CLE. Thirty pathologists were invited to review three ten-case sets of CLE biopsies. In the first set, the cases were provided with descriptive endoscopy only; in the second and the third sets, ESEM extent using Prague criteria was provided. Moreover, participants were required to refer to a diagnostic chart for evaluation of the third set. Agreement was statistically assessed using Randolph’s free-marginal multirater kappa. While substantial agreement in recognizing columnar epithelium (K = 0.76) was recorded, the overall concordance in clinico-pathological diagnosis was low (K = 0.38). The overall concordance rate improved from the first (K = 0.27) to the second (K = 0.40) and third step (K = 0.46). Agreement was substantial when diagnosing Barrett’s esophagus (BE) with intestinal metaplasia or inlet patch (K = 0.65 and K = 0.89), respectively, in the third step, while major problems in interpretation of CLE were observed when only cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium was present (K = 0.05–0.29). In conclusion, precise endoscopic description and the use of a diagnostic chart increased consistency in CLE interpretation of esophageal biopsies. Agreement was substantial for some diagnostic categories (BE with intestinal metaplasia and inlet patch) with a well-defined clinical profile. Interpretation of cases with cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium, with or without ESEM, was least consistent, which reflects lack of clarity of definition and results in variable management of this entity.",
keywords = "Barrett’s esophagus, Columnar-lined esophagus, Histological diagnosis, Interobserver variation",
author = "Luca Mastracci and Nataniele Piol and Luca Molinaro and Francesca Pitto and Carmine Tinelli and {De Silvestri}, Annalisa and Roberto Fiocca and Federica Grillo",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00428-015-1878-5",
language = "English",
volume = "468",
pages = "159--167",
journal = "Virchows Archiv - A Pathological Anatomy and Histopathology",
issn = "0945-6317",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interobserver reproducibility in pathologist interpretation of columnar-lined esophagus

AU - Mastracci, Luca

AU - Piol, Nataniele

AU - Molinaro, Luca

AU - Pitto, Francesca

AU - Tinelli, Carmine

AU - De Silvestri, Annalisa

AU - Fiocca, Roberto

AU - Grillo, Federica

PY - 2016/2/1

Y1 - 2016/2/1

N2 - Confirmation of endoscopically suspected esophageal metaplasia (ESEM) requires histology, but confusion in the histological definition of columnar-lined esophagus (CLE) is a longstanding problem. The aim of this study is to evaluate interpathologist variability in the interpretation of CLE. Thirty pathologists were invited to review three ten-case sets of CLE biopsies. In the first set, the cases were provided with descriptive endoscopy only; in the second and the third sets, ESEM extent using Prague criteria was provided. Moreover, participants were required to refer to a diagnostic chart for evaluation of the third set. Agreement was statistically assessed using Randolph’s free-marginal multirater kappa. While substantial agreement in recognizing columnar epithelium (K = 0.76) was recorded, the overall concordance in clinico-pathological diagnosis was low (K = 0.38). The overall concordance rate improved from the first (K = 0.27) to the second (K = 0.40) and third step (K = 0.46). Agreement was substantial when diagnosing Barrett’s esophagus (BE) with intestinal metaplasia or inlet patch (K = 0.65 and K = 0.89), respectively, in the third step, while major problems in interpretation of CLE were observed when only cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium was present (K = 0.05–0.29). In conclusion, precise endoscopic description and the use of a diagnostic chart increased consistency in CLE interpretation of esophageal biopsies. Agreement was substantial for some diagnostic categories (BE with intestinal metaplasia and inlet patch) with a well-defined clinical profile. Interpretation of cases with cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium, with or without ESEM, was least consistent, which reflects lack of clarity of definition and results in variable management of this entity.

AB - Confirmation of endoscopically suspected esophageal metaplasia (ESEM) requires histology, but confusion in the histological definition of columnar-lined esophagus (CLE) is a longstanding problem. The aim of this study is to evaluate interpathologist variability in the interpretation of CLE. Thirty pathologists were invited to review three ten-case sets of CLE biopsies. In the first set, the cases were provided with descriptive endoscopy only; in the second and the third sets, ESEM extent using Prague criteria was provided. Moreover, participants were required to refer to a diagnostic chart for evaluation of the third set. Agreement was statistically assessed using Randolph’s free-marginal multirater kappa. While substantial agreement in recognizing columnar epithelium (K = 0.76) was recorded, the overall concordance in clinico-pathological diagnosis was low (K = 0.38). The overall concordance rate improved from the first (K = 0.27) to the second (K = 0.40) and third step (K = 0.46). Agreement was substantial when diagnosing Barrett’s esophagus (BE) with intestinal metaplasia or inlet patch (K = 0.65 and K = 0.89), respectively, in the third step, while major problems in interpretation of CLE were observed when only cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium was present (K = 0.05–0.29). In conclusion, precise endoscopic description and the use of a diagnostic chart increased consistency in CLE interpretation of esophageal biopsies. Agreement was substantial for some diagnostic categories (BE with intestinal metaplasia and inlet patch) with a well-defined clinical profile. Interpretation of cases with cardia/cardia-oxyntic atrophic-type epithelium, with or without ESEM, was least consistent, which reflects lack of clarity of definition and results in variable management of this entity.

KW - Barrett’s esophagus

KW - Columnar-lined esophagus

KW - Histological diagnosis

KW - Interobserver variation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959576730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84959576730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00428-015-1878-5

DO - 10.1007/s00428-015-1878-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 26563401

AN - SCOPUS:84959576730

VL - 468

SP - 159

EP - 167

JO - Virchows Archiv - A Pathological Anatomy and Histopathology

JF - Virchows Archiv - A Pathological Anatomy and Histopathology

SN - 0945-6317

IS - 2

ER -