Endoscopists' estimation of size should not determine surveillance of colonic polyps.

Objective: Current British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines use adenomatous polyp size as one of the key factors in determining polyp follow-up. This study aimed to compare polyp size assessment by colonoscopists and pathologists before and after fixation to determine the optimal method for measurement.

Method: Thirty-five colorectal polyps were found during pre-arranged colonoscopies in one centre. Polyp size was measured to the nearest 1 mm by three different methods: 1. by the endoscopist at colonoscopy; 2. by the pathologist fresh, following removal; 3. by the pathologist fixed, following fixation. The endoscopist and the pathologist were blinded to each other's measurements.

Results: Seventeen men, eighteen women with mean age of 66.2 years (SD: 9.4, range: 38.7-85.5) underwent polypectomy/s with all polyps removed intact. Polypectomies were performed by consultants (43%), nurse specialists (34%) and specialist registrars (23%). The median size (mm) of polyps measured were endoscopically, 6.5 (2-25 mm); fresh specimen 7.0 (4-28 mm) and fixed 7.0 (4-28 mm). Endoscopic measurements were significantly lower than that of fresh and fixed sizes (P < 0.001 and P = 0.003 respectively), with poor correlation [correlation of variance (CV): 21.0% and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCC): 0.841 for endoscopic and fresh measurements; CV: 21.1% and ICCC: 0.838 for endoscopic and fixed measurements]. There was no statistical difference between fresh and fixed specimen measurements (P > 0.05; CV: 4.2%, ICCC: 0.974). In three patients, the endoscopic measurement was < 1 cm in polyps that were found to be >or= 1 cm on pathological measurement.

Conclusions: Endoscopists consistently underestimated polyp size. Fixation had no effect on polyp size. Pathologists' measurement of polyp size on fixed specimens should determine the need for further colonoscopic follow-up.