Context.—

During the past 3 decades, numerous articles in the literature have offered terminology, diagnostic criteria, and consensus recommendations regarding the entity currently referred to by the World Health Organization as sessile serrated lesion. Given the many names and various, variably reproducible diagnostic criteria ascribed to sessile serrated lesion, confusion persists for many pathologists and gastroenterologists regarding the diagnosis. This distinction is important, as sessile serrated lesion can progress to malignancy, unlike its main differential diagnosis, hyperplastic polyp. Research studies have shed light on the characteristic architecture and morphology, immunohistochemical patterns, and molecular alterations of sessile serrated lesion, and multiple consensus meetings around the globe have developed their criteria and nomenclature, often clashing or mixing terms.

Objective.—

To provide a narrative review from the entity's early description to our current understanding.

Data Sources.—

The existing scientific and clinical literature, published texts, medical society recommendations, and specialty consensus guidelines.

Conclusions.—

The current World Health Organization criteria are a distillation of this scientific process, but terminology is still a point of contention worldwide.

This content is only available as a PDF.

Author notes

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. See text for hyperlink.

The authors have no relevant financial interest in the products or companies described in this article.

Supplementary data