JWBK208-11 December 8, 2007 16:3 Char Count= 0
Alimentary Tract 138
Fundic Gland Polyp
r
Usu. fundal mucosa and average size <5mm
r
Cystically dilated fundic glands
r
Bland, often attenuated epithelium in cysts
r
Assoc
d
with: idiopathic, long term gastric acid suppression, FAP (dysplasia common)
Inflammatory Fibroid Polyp
r
Macro: smooth submucosal mass that may ulcerate, usu. <5cm, occurs in upper & lower GIT
r
Submucosal vascular granulation tissue with variable inflammatory infiltrate
r
Perivascular hypocellular zones
r
Variable n˜o. of eosinophils (but not peripheral eosinophilia)
r
± Leiomyoma / Schwannoma-like areas with nuclear palisading
r
Immuno: CD34 +ve, >95% are −ve for c-kit
Peutz-Jeghers Polyp – See p. 149
Hyperplastic Polyp (Regenerative Polyp)
r
Usu. junctional mucosa and average size 1cm (if >2cm have ↑ risk of dysplasia / carcinoma)
r
Cystic ± branching foveolar hyperplasia and ‘onion skin’ concentric arrangement of glands
r
Stromal oedema ++, ± inflam
n
, smooth muscle fibres extend up around gland aggregates
r
Bland epithelium ± inflam
y
atypia / ulceration (! d/dg focal dysplasia / CA which may also occur)
Dysplasia (Flat / Non-Polypoid)
r
Usual features of dysplasia extending to the surface in the absence of complicating factors
r
Low grade: cytological features not marked, mitoses normal, architecture minimally disturbed
r
High grade: marked cytological +/ arch. atypia, abnormal mitoses
r
May occur within i.m. (goblets may loose polarity) or apart from i.m. but is often assoc
d
with i.m.
r
Immuno: p53 nuclear +vity and Ki-67 extending to the surface epithelium favour dysplasia
r
d/dg (complicating factors): sig. PMN infiltrate, foveolar hyperplasia, granulation tissue, ulcer slough
r
d/dg chemoRx / radioRx atypia shows surface maturation, preserved polarity, cytoplasmic
eosinophilia/vacuoles, microcystic arch. in deeper glands, normal mitoses present in normal distribution
(also p53 −ve & Ki-67 restricted to usual proliferative zones), no i.m. nearby
Adenomatous Polyp (Gastric Adenoma)
r
Usu. sessile, solitary and antral and may be large (few cm) ± nearby intestinal metaplasia
r
Arch.: tubular, villous and TV ± underlying non-dysplastic cystic gastric glands
r
Cytology: mild / moderate / severe dysplasia (criteria are as for colonic adenomas)
r
± intestinal differentiation (absorptive, goblet, NE and Paneth cells) which may predominate
r
Invasive foci: single cell infiltration / solid areas / back-to-back cribriform areas
r
Must assess completeness of excision
r
d/dg hyperplastic / other polyps: presence of dysplasia and intestinal differentiation in adenomas
Gastric Carcinoma: Classification, Grading and Typing
r
Laur´en’s classification of gastric carcinoma:
intestinal (tubules/papillae ± solid foci, cuboidal / columnar cytoplasm, basal nuclei)
diffuse (infiltrative polygonal cells, often signet ring). Signet ring cells usu. have acid mucin
cf. the neutral mucin of benign gastric epithelium hence the use of an ABDPAS for screening
gastric biopsies (! but some signet ring carcinomas have purely neutral mucin).
mixed / unclassified (Carneiro’s classification is similar but subdivides the unclassified group
into solid [cords and islands] and mixed [diffuse plus intestinal / solid – the smallest component
being ≥5% of the tumour] subtypes)
r
Ming’s classification of gastric carcinoma:
expansile margin with discrete nodules (better prog. unless early gastric cancer)
infiltrative (worse prognosis unless early gastric cancer)
r
Mucin-based (intra and extracellular) classifications (e.g. intracellular mucin with Goseki):
mucin poor: better prog. (Goseki group1–well-formed tubules, 3 – poorly-formed tubules)
mucin-rich: poorer prog. (Goseki group2–well-formed tubules, 4 – poorly-formed tubules)
r
WHO classification:
by predominant pattern: papillary, tubular, mucinous, signet ring, special types (vide infra)
widely believed to be prognostically useless