OBJECTIVETo study the reasons for the discrepancies in pathologic diagnosis of gastric dysplasia/early cancer in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) specimens, and how to cope with the discrepancies.

METHODSThe pathologic diagnoses in 60 cases of ESD specimens according to the three currently used classification systems (namely Western criteria, Japanese criteria and Vienna classification) were compared. The diagnostic discrepancies were analyzed.

RESULTSFifteen of the 17 cases diagnosed as low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia according to the Western criteria were revised as adenoma by the Japanese criteria. Amongst the 43 cases of gastric intramucosal adenocarcinoma diagnosed according to the Japanese criteria, 23 cases had concordant diagnosis by the Western criteria. While the diagnosis of low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia/adenoma was basically similar irrespective of classification system used, there were significant differences in the interpretation of gastric early cancer.

CONCLUSIONSThe diagnostic discrepancies in the gastric dysplasia/early cancer are mainly related to the morphologic criteria applied in different classifications. In order to facilitate clinical and pathologic communication, a consensus using Vienna/WHO classifications, supplemented with Japanese system, is desirable.