-
Ugeskrift for laeger · Oct 1990
Comparative Study[Proctoscopic versus histologic diagnosis of rectal polyps].
- T Myrhøj, S Bülow, S Boesby, and E Hage.
- Rigshospitalet, kirurgisk gastroenterologisk afdeling C, København.
- Ugeskr. Laeg. 1990 Oct 29; 152 (44): 3254-5.
AbstractOn the basis of the endoscopic appearance, 71 rectal polyps were assessed as adenomata or non-neoplastic polyps, after which the endoscopic diagnosis was compared with the results of histological examination. The diagnosis based on macroscopic examination of the polyps proved correct in only 62% of the cases. It is concluded that the diagnosis of adenoma cannot be established solely on the proctoscopic appearance of a polyp and, as adenomata are premalignant, removal of all polyps found at proctoscopy is recommended.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..