Scholarlink

Background <p>Colonic polyps are described based on their macroscopic shape, according to the Paris classification. This represents a useful tool to communicate polyp and lesion morphology between endoscopists, however, the agreement between endoscopists on polyp morphology evaluation has not been demonstrated in the literature. We were interested in evaluating endoscopist agreement using the Paris classification.</p> Methods <p>We conducted a prospective video-based study evaluating endoscopist assessment of lesion morphology. An international group of endoscopists including surgeons, gastroenterologists, experts and trainees were included. Primary outcome was overall inter-observer agreement for the Paris classification. Secondary outcomes were inter-observer agreement stratified by endoscopist characteristics.</p> Results <p>11 endoscopists were included in the analysis with 1320 morphologic assessments of 120 individual polyps. There was low overall inter-observer agreement for the Paris classification with an overall Light’s Kappa of 0.19 (95%CI 0.14–0.24). Agreement remained low for men (<i>K</i> = 0.25; 95%CI 0.20–0.30), women (<i>K</i> = 0.25; 95%CI 0.18–0.35), gastroenterologists (<i>K</i> = 0.23; 95%CI 0.19–0.29), surgeons (<i>K</i> = 0.11; 95%CI 0.05–0.18), trainees (<i>K</i> = 0.19; 95%CI 0.13–0.25), and experts (<i>K</i> = 0.16; 95%CI 0.11–0.22). Endoscopists who have received training on lesion evaluation in Asia had higher inter-observer agreement when using the Paris classification compared to endoscopists in the west (<i>K</i> = 0.50; 95%CI 0.42–0.59 vs 0.26; 95%CI 0.18–0.34).</p> Conclusions <p>Agreement when using the Paris classification was low amongst a varied international group of surgeons, gastroenterologists, trainees and experts. Training in the east, where higher emphasis is placed on lesion characterization was associated with the highest inter-observer agreement.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Interobserver Agreement for the Paris Classification of Colorectal Lesions Amongst Surgeons, Gastroenterologists, Trainees and Experts: A Video-Based Study

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月24日

查看全文
  • Roupen Djinbachian,
  • Abla Alj,
  • Edgard Medawar,
  • Mathieu Pioche,
  • Yutaka Saito,
  • Amrita Sethi,
  • Philip Chiu,
  • Jeffrey Marks,
  • Herawaty Sebajang,
  • Katarzyna Pawlak,
  • Anas Chennouf,
  • Florence Benard,
  • Yutaro Ide,
  • Frances Dang,
  • Daniel von Renteln

摘要

Background

Colonic polyps are described based on their macroscopic shape, according to the Paris classification. This represents a useful tool to communicate polyp and lesion morphology between endoscopists, however, the agreement between endoscopists on polyp morphology evaluation has not been demonstrated in the literature. We were interested in evaluating endoscopist agreement using the Paris classification.

Methods

We conducted a prospective video-based study evaluating endoscopist assessment of lesion morphology. An international group of endoscopists including surgeons, gastroenterologists, experts and trainees were included. Primary outcome was overall inter-observer agreement for the Paris classification. Secondary outcomes were inter-observer agreement stratified by endoscopist characteristics.

Results

11 endoscopists were included in the analysis with 1320 morphologic assessments of 120 individual polyps. There was low overall inter-observer agreement for the Paris classification with an overall Light’s Kappa of 0.19 (95%CI 0.14–0.24). Agreement remained low for men (K = 0.25; 95%CI 0.20–0.30), women (K = 0.25; 95%CI 0.18–0.35), gastroenterologists (K = 0.23; 95%CI 0.19–0.29), surgeons (K = 0.11; 95%CI 0.05–0.18), trainees (K = 0.19; 95%CI 0.13–0.25), and experts (K = 0.16; 95%CI 0.11–0.22). Endoscopists who have received training on lesion evaluation in Asia had higher inter-observer agreement when using the Paris classification compared to endoscopists in the west (K = 0.50; 95%CI 0.42–0.59 vs 0.26; 95%CI 0.18–0.34).

Conclusions

Agreement when using the Paris classification was low amongst a varied international group of surgeons, gastroenterologists, trainees and experts. Training in the east, where higher emphasis is placed on lesion characterization was associated with the highest inter-observer agreement.