Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Nov 6, 2020; 8(21): 5180-5187
Published online Nov 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5180
Table 1 Comparison of clinical characteristics and endoscopic features
ItemYamada type
Total
I
II
III
IV
Number of polyps, examples475101115295
Sex
Male4576197219
Female018401876
Age
< 600315061149
≥ 604445154146
Polyp size in cm
0.5-0.91555831145
≥ 13204384150
Surface morphology of polyps, examples
Bloody and red0294583157
Smooth336312292
Rough and unkempt1264641114
Lobular010224577
Dissipated1531120
Polyp site, examples
Left hemicolon, including rectum0465867171
Right hemicolon, including ileocecum4294348124
Table 2 Comparison of general clinical conditions of each group
GroupSex
Age
Size of the polyp in cm
Site of the polyp in cm
Female
Male
< 60
≥ 60
0.5-0.9
≥ 1
Left colon, including the rectum
Right colon, including the ileocecal region
Non-adenoma2813202128132120
Low-risk adenoma8129525810555852
High-risk adenoma106336475111288950
Carcinogenesis41140532
χ2 value1.1621.535199.8255.416
P value0.7620.67400.144
Table 3 Comparison of morphological characteristics of each group under endoscopy
GroupsPolyp pattern
Yamada type
Bloody, red
Smooth
Coarse, not smooth
Leaflets
Eroded
I
II
III
IV
Non-adenoma15258542121413
Low-risk adenoma5344531150433928
High-risk adenoma88235259101194871
Carcinogenesis005211103
χ2 value75.25747.676
P value00