Clin Endosc.  2023 May;56(3):325-332. 10.5946/ce.2022.147.

Accuracy of administrative claim data for gastric adenoma after endoscopic resection

• Shin GY
• Choi HH
• Park JM
• Kim SY
• Park JY
• Kang D
• Cho YK
• Kim SS
• Choi MG

• KMID: 2542460
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2022.147

Abstract

Background/Aims
Administrative databases provide valuable information for large-cohort studies. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of an administrative database for resected gastric adenomas.
Methods
Data of patients who underwent endoscopic resection for benign gastric lesions were collected from three hospitals. Gastric adenoma cases were identified in the hospital database using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 10-codes. The non-adenoma group included patients without gastric adenoma codes. The diagnostic accuracy for gastric adenoma was analyzed based on the pathological reports of the resected specimen.
Results
Among 5,095 endoscopic resections with codes for benign gastric lesions, 3,909 patients were included in the analysis. Among them, 2,831 and 1,078 patients were allocated to the adenoma and non-adenoma groups, respectively. Regarding the overall diagnosis of gastric adenoma with ICD-10 codes, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 98.7%, 88.5%, 95.2%, and 96.8%, respectively. There were no significant differences in these parameters between the tertiary and secondary centers.
Conclusions
Administrative codes of gastric adenoma, according to ICD-10 codes, showed good accuracy and can serve as a useful tool to study prognosis of these patients in real-world data studies in the future.

Keyword

Data accuracy; Endoscopic resection; Gastric neoplasms; International classification of diseases

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Study algorithm for the inclusion and classification of subjects.

• 

  Fig. 2. Patient enrollment in each hospital. A tertiary (A) and secondary (B, C) referral center.

• 

Reference

1. Office of the Secretary, HHS. Administrative simplification: adoption of a standard for a unique health plan identifier; addition to the National Provider Identifier requirements; and a change to the compliance date for the International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition (ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS) medical data code sets. Final rule. Fed Regist. 2012; 77:54663–54720.

2. Jeong HS, Lee JH, Shin JW, et al. Scale and structure of 2006 total health expenditure in Korea constructed according to OECD/WHO/EUROSTAT’s SHA (System of Health Accounts). Korean J Health Econ Policy. 2008; 14:151–169.

3. Park B, Park P, Sung K. Validity of diagnosis code on National Health Insurance Claim Database. Seoul National University School of Medicine;2003.

4. Aljunid SM, Srithamrongsawat S, Chen W, et al. Health-care data collecting, sharing, and using in Thailand, China mainland, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and Malaysia. Value Health. 2012; 15(Suppl 1):S132–S138.

5. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018; 68:394–424.

6. Lauwers GY, Riddell RH. Gastric epithelial dysplasia. Gut. 1999; 45:784–790.

7. Di Gregorio C, Morandi P, Fante R, et al. Gastric dysplasia: a follow-up study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993; 88:1714–1719.

8. Yamada H, Ikegami M, Shimoda T, et al. Long-term follow-up study of gastric adenoma/dysplasia. Endoscopy. 2004; 36:390–396.

9. Lansdown M, Quirke P, Dixon MF, et al. High grade dysplasia of the gastric mucosa: a marker for gastric carcinoma. Gut. 1990; 31:977–983.

10. Rugge M, Cassaro M, Di Mario F, et al. The long term outcome of gastric non-invasive neoplasia. Gut. 2003; 52:1111–1116.

11. Maekawa A, Kato M, Nakamura T, et al. Incidence of gastric adenocarcinoma among lesions diagnosed as low-grade adenoma/dysplasia on endoscopic biopsy: a multicenter, prospective, observational study. Dig Endosc. 2018; 30:228–235.

12. Cho SJ, Choi IJ, Kim CG, et al. Risk of high-grade dysplasia or carcinoma in gastric biopsy-proven low-grade dysplasia: an analysis using the Vienna classification. Endoscopy. 2011; 43:465–471.

13. Kang DH, Choi CW, Kim HW, et al. Predictors of upstage diagnosis after endoscopic resection of gastric low-grade dysplasia. Surg Endosc. 2018; 32:2732–2738.

14. Dinis-Ribeiro M, Areia M, de Vries AC, et al. Management of precancerous conditions and lesions in the stomach (MAPS): guideline from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), European Helicobacter Study Group (EHSG), European Society of Pathology (ESP), and the Sociedade Portuguesa de Endoscopia Digestiva (SPED). Endoscopy. 2012; 44:74–94.

15. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Evans JA, Chandrasekhara V, et al. The role of endoscopy in the management of premalignant and malignant conditions of the stomach. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 82:1–8.

16. Kim MH, Chang J, Kim WJ, et al. Cumulative dose threshold for the chemopreventive effect of aspirin against gastric cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018; 113:845–854.

17. Shin GY, Park JM, Hong J, et al. Use of proton pump inhibitors vs histamine 2 receptor antagonists for the risk of gastric cancer: population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021; 116:1211–1219.

18. Nam JH, Jang SI, Park HS, et al. The effect of menopausal hormone therapy on gastrointestinal cancer risk and mortality in South Korea: a population-based cohort study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2021; 21:440.

19. Kim J, Hyun HJ, Choi EA, et al. Metformin use reduced the risk of stomach cancer in diabetic patients in Korea: an analysis of Korean NHIS-HEALS database. Gastric Cancer. 2020; 23:1075–1083.

20. Kim JM, Sohn JH, Cho MY, et al. Pre- and post-ESD discrepancies in clinicopathologic criteria in early gastric cancer: the NECA-Korea ESD for Early Gastric Cancer Prospective Study (N-Keep). Gastric Cancer. 2016; 19:1104–1113.

21. Kim YJ, Park JC, Kim JH, et al. Histologic diagnosis based on forceps biopsy is not adequate for determining endoscopic treatment of gastric adenomatous lesions. Endoscopy. 2010; 42:620–626.

22. Goldstein NS, Lewin KJ. Gastric epithelial dysplasia and adenoma: historical review and histological criteria for grading. Hum Pathol. 1997; 28:127–133.

23. Kim JM, Sohn JH, Cho MY, et al. Inter-observer reproducibility in the pathologic diagnosis of gastric intraepithelial neoplasia and early carcinoma in endoscopic submucosal dissection specimens: a multi-center study. Cancer Res Treat. 2019; 51:1568–1577.