BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Observational Study
Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Nov 16, 2026; 18(11): 126001
Published online Nov 16, 2026. doi: 10.4253/wjge.126001
Table 1 Patients’ demographic and baseline characteristics, n (%)
Parameter
Value
No. of patients110
Age (years), median (IQR)68 (18.0)
Sex
Male62 (56.4)
Female48 (43.6)
Personal history adenoma56 (50.9)
Personal history CRC8 (7.3)
Family history CRC20 (18.2)
BBPS score, median (IQR)7 (3.0)
Colonoscopy indication
Screening47 (42.7)
Surveillance34 (30.9)
Diagnostic29 (26.4)
Table 2 Polyp characteristics, n (%)
Parameter
Value
No. of polyps137
Anatomical location
Cecum14 (10.2)
Ascending32 (23.4)
Transverse36 (26.3)
Descending30 (21.9)
Sigmoid20 (14.6)
Rectum5 (3.6)
Polyp size categories1
≤ 5 mm115 (83.9)
6-9 mm18 (13.1)
≥ 10 mm4 (3.0)
Polyp type
Adenoma91 (66.4)
Serrated35 (25.6)
Other8 (5.8)
Missing3 (2.2)
Paris classification
0-Ip8 (5.8)
0-Is75 (54.7)
0-IIa52 (38.0)
Missing2 (1.5)
Resection method
Cold snare86 (62.8)
Hot snare8 (5.8)
EMR1 (0.7)
Missing242 (30.7)
Table 3 Polyp size misclassification using biopsy forceps-assisted size measurement and visual assessment compared to the reference laser-based size measurements
Polyp size misclassifications, n/N (%)1
BF
VA
> 5 mm2 as ≤ 5 mm3/22 (13.6)3/22 (13.6)
≤ 5 mm as > 5 mm13/115 (11.3)13/115 (11.3)
≥ 10 mm as < 10 mm32/4 (50.0)2/4 (50.0)
< 10 mm as ≥ 10 mm3/133 (2.3)4/133 (3.0)


Write to the Help Desk