Chronic Pancreatitis: What the Clinician Wants to Know from MR Imaging

Pancreatic Incidentaloma

Pancreatic incidentalomas (PIs) represent a clinical entity increasingly recognized due to advances in and easier access to imaging techniques. By definition, PIs should be detected during abdominal imaging performed for indications other than a pancreatic disease. They range from small cysts to invasive cancer. The incidental diagnosis of pancreatic cancer can contribute to early diagnosis and treatment. On the other hand, inadequate management of PIs may result in overtreatment and unneeded morbidity. Therefore, there is a strong need to evaluate the nature and clinical features of individual PIs. In this review, we summarize the major characteristics related to PIs and present suggestions for their management.

Magnetic resonance imaging glossary of findings of pediatric pancreatitis and the revised Atlanta classification

While still uncommon, the incidence of acute pancreatitis in children has been increasing over the last two decades. The Atlanta classification for acute pancreatitis, developed for adults, stratifies cases of acute pancreatitis based on imaging and clinical criteria. This classification scheme allows for standardized use of terminology to facilitate treatment and prognostication. Although US and CT should be used in critical or unstable patients, MRI is an ideal imaging modality in pediatric patients with acute pancreatitis because of its ability to characterize tissue without ionizing radiation. We review MRI examples specific to Atlanta classification terminology in pediatric patients. Chronic pancreatitis has also been increasingly diagnosed in children, and imaging plays a key role in the diagnosis and management of this insidious disease. MRI with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is the optimal modality for assessing the pancreas in a child with known or suspected chronic pancreatitis because it provides tissue characterization and high-contrast imaging of the pancreatic duct without the use of invasive instrumentation or ionizing radiation. We also review and demonstrate accepted MRI findings of chronic pancreatitis.

Development of a standardized MRI protocol for pancreas assessment in humans

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has detected changes in pancreas volume and other characteristics in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. However, differences in MRI technology and approaches across locations currently limit the incorporation of pancreas imaging into multisite trials. The purpose of this study was to develop a standardized MRI protocol for pancreas imaging and to define the reproducibility of these measurements. Calibrated phantoms with known MRI properties were imaged at five sites with differing MRI hardware and software to develop a harmonized MRI imaging protocol. Subsequently, five healthy volunteers underwent MRI at four sites using the harmonized protocol to assess pancreas size, shape, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), longitudinal relaxation time (T1), magnetization transfer ratio (MTR), and pancreas and hepatic fat fraction. Following harmonization, pancreas size, surface area to volume ratio, diffusion, and longitudinal relaxation time were reproducible, with coefficients of variation less than 10%. In contrast, non-standardized image processing led to greater variation in MRI measurements. By using a standardized MRI image acquisition and processing protocol, quantitative MRI of the pancreas performed at multiple locations can be incorporated into clinical trials comparing pancreas imaging measures and metabolic state in individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.

Chemical pancreatectomy treats chronic pancreatitis while preserving endocrine function in preclinical models

Chronic pancreatitis affects over 250,000 people in the US and millions worldwide. It is associated with chronic debilitating pain, pancreatic exocrine failure, and high risk of pancreatic cancer and usually progresses to diabetes. Treatment options are limited and ineffective. We developed a new potential therapy, wherein a pancreatic ductal infusion of 1%-2% acetic acid in mice and nonhuman primates resulted in a nonregenerative, near-complete ablation of the exocrine pancreas, with complete preservation of the islets. Pancreatic ductal infusion of acetic acid in a mouse model of chronic pancreatitis led to resolution of chronic inflammation and pancreatitis-associated pain. Furthermore, acetic acid-treated animals showed improved glucose tolerance and insulin secretion. The loss of exocrine tissue in this procedure would not typically require further management in patients with chronic pancreatitis because they usually have pancreatic exocrine failure requiring dietary enzyme supplements. Thus, this procedure, which should be readily translatable to humans through an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), may offer a potential innovative nonsurgical therapy for chronic pancreatitis that relieves pain and prevents the progression of pancreatic diabetes.

Is Cambridge scoring in chronic pancreatitis the same using ERCP and MRCP?: A need for revision of standards

PURPOSE

Grading of chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a clinical and radiologic challenge. Retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) use a version of the Cambridge criteria for ductal evaluation and CP staging, but interchangeability between the modalities lacks validation. This work compares ERCP and MRCP Cambridge scores and evaluates diagnostic performance of MRCP in a large cohort of patients with CP.

METHODS

A large radiology database was searched for CP patients who underwent MRCP between 2003 and 2013. Next, patients who also had an ERCP within 90 days of their MRCP were selected. These were categorized into mild, moderate, and severe CP using the standardized Cambridge classification for ERCP. Radiologists blinded to ERCP findings then rated MRCP with modified Cambridge scores.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 325 patients (mean age 51 years; 56% female). By ERCP Cambridge classification, 122 had mild CP, 109 moderate CP, and 94 severe CP. MRCP and ERCP showed total agreement of Cambridge score in only 43% of cases. With ERCP as reference, the sensitivity and specificity of MRCP in detecting Cambridge scores 4 + 5 (main-duct predominant) were 75.9% and 64.3%, and for Cambridge score 3 (side-branch predominant) it was 60.0% and 76.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of strong concordance between ERCP- and MRCP-based grading of CP using the Cambridge criteria. MRCP had moderate to good performance in diagnosing side-branch predominant versus main-duct predominant CP. This suggests an inherent challenge in comparing literature and calls for a revision of the standards.

Mass-forming pancreatitis versus pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: CT and MR imaging for differentiation

Various inflammatory abnormalities of the pancreas can mimic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at cross-sectional imaging. Misdiagnosis of PDAC at imaging may lead to unnecessary surgery. On the other hand, chronic pancreatitis (CP) bears a greater risk of developing PDAC during the course of the disease. Thus, differentiation between mass-forming chronic pancreatitis (MFCP) and PDAC is important to avoid unnecessary surgery and not to delay surgery of synchronous PDAC in CP.

Imaging features such as the morphology of the mass including displacement of calcifications, presence of duct penetrating, sign appearance of duct stricturing, presence or absence of vessel encasement, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) at diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in PET/CT, and mass perfusion parameters can help to differentiate between PDAC and MFCP. Correct interpretation of imaging features can appropriately guide biopsy and surgery, if necessary. This review summarizes the relevant computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features that can help the radiologist to come to a confident diagnosis and to guide further management in equivocal cases.

CT and MR features that can help to differentiate between focal chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer

Diagnosis of a focal pancreatic mass in routine clinical practice can be a challenge because patients with chronic pancreatitis may present with symptoms and imaging findings that can be difficult to distinguish from pancreatic cancer. Markers, such as cancer antigen 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen, are helpful if abnormal, but normal values do not rule out pancreatic cancer. One of the strongest complicating factors is that chronic pancreatitis is a risk factor for pancreatic cancer. Transition of chronic pancreatitis to pancreatic cancer is relatively rare, but it normally has a poor prognosis because diagnosis is often delayed. From a radiologic diagnosis perspective, the classic so-called double-duct sign is helpful. This sign is considered a hallmark sign of pancreatic cancer on magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, but it can also be identified in patients with chronic pancreatitis or with other conditions. A number of additional imaging findings or signs are, therefore, necessary. The aim of this article was to describe the strong CT and MR imaging features or integrated imaging features that can help to differentiate between pancreatic cancer and focal chronic pancreatitis.

Interobserver agreement of computed tomography reporting standards for chronic pancreatitis

AIM

To assess the interobserver agreement of computed tomography (CT) reporting standards for chronic pancreatitis (CP).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of CT of 47 patients (33 males and 11 females, age range 36 to 56 years) with CP who presented with abdominal pain (n = 41), steatorrhea (n = 37), and glucose intolerance (n = 31). The patients underwent CT study using a 16-multidetector CT scanner with a pancreatic protocol including a nonenhanced scan followed by pancreatic phase at 35 s and portal venous phase at 65 s after intravenous injection of nonionic contrast medium. Image analysis was performed by two radiologists according to reporting standards for CP.

RESULTS

There was excellent interobserver agreement (84.8 %) between the two reviewers in CT reporting standards for CP (K = 0.80, 95 % CI 0.75-0.85, P = 0.001). There was good interobserver agreement for pancreatic duct (PD) caliber (K = 0.71, 95 % CI 0.56-0.87, P = 0.001), PD contour (K = 0.76, 95 % CI 0.61-0.91, P = 0.001), PD stricture (K = 0.070, 95 % CI 0.53-0.88, P = 0.001), and distribution of findings (K = 0.69, 95 % CI 0.51-0.86, P = 0.001). There was excellent interobserver agreement for intraductal calculi (K = 0.84, 95 % CI 0.68-0.98, P = 0.001), pancreatic calcifications (K = 0.86, 95 % CI 0.84-0.98, P = 0.001), and pancreatic diameter (K = 0.87, 95 % CI 0.75-0.99, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

CT reporting standards for CP is a reliable method for diagnosis of patients with CP.