Volumetric and morphological analysis of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the pancreas using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging

Pancreatic cancer in patient with groove pancreatitis: Potential pitfalls in diagnosis

Pancreatic cancer is among the leading causes of cancer death in the United States of America. Early detection and intervention are critical as a large majority of patients have either local or distant metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. However, groove pancreatitis, a rare form of chronic pancreatitis, presents as a challenge for adequate and efficient differential diagnosis of pancreatic cancer as a result of similar clinical symptoms and imaging features. Furthermore, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia are 2 of the precursor lesions that have been identified with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms are cystic tumors of the pancreas characterized by excessive mucin production in either the main pancreatic duct or its branches. Conversely, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia are microscopic lesions in the smaller pancreatic ducts. In this article, we report the case of a 46-year-old male with a diagnosis of groove pancreatitis, main duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia whose tumor was excised by means of a Whipple procedure. We focus on optimizing diagnosis and treatment through the application of radiological modalities.

Higher volume growth rate is associated with development of worrisome features in patients with branch duct-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Branch duct-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) are the most common pancreatic cystic tumours and have a low risk of malignant transformation. Current guidelines only evaluate cyst diameter as an important risk factor but it is not always easy to measure, especially when comparing different methods. On the other side, cyst volume is a new parameter with low inter-observer variability and is highly reproducible over time.

AIM

To assess both diameter and volume growth rate of BD-IPMNs and evaluate their correlation with the development of malignant characteristics.

METHODS

Computed tomography scans and magnetic resonance imaging exams were retrospectively reviewed. The diameter was measured on three planes, while the volume was calculated by segmentation: The volume of the entire cyst was determined by manually drawing a region of interest along the edge of the neoplasm on each consecutive slice covering the whole lesion; therefore, a three-dimensional volume of interest was finally obtained with the calculated value expressed in cm³. Changes in size over time were measured. The development of worrisome features was evaluated.

RESULTS

We evaluated exams of 98 patients across a 40.5-mo median follow-up time. Ten patients developed worrisome features. Cysts at baseline were significantly larger in patients who developed worrisome features (diameters P = 0.0035, P = 0.00652, P = 0.00424; volume P = 0.00222). Volume growth rate was significantly higher in patients who developed worrisome features (1.12 cm³/year vs 0 cm³/year, P = 0.0001); diameter growth rate was higher as well, but the difference did not always reach statistical significance. Volume but not diameter growth rate in the first year of follow-up was higher in patients who developed worrisome features (0.46 cm³/year vs 0 cm³/year, P = 0.00634).

CONCLUSION

The measurement of baseline volume and its variation over time is a reliable tool for the follow-up of BD-IPMNs. Volume measurement could be a better tool than diameter measurement to predict the development of worrisome features.

Branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN): Are cyst volumetry and other novel imaging features able to improve malignancy prediction compared to well-established resection criteria?

OBJECTIVES

Current guidelines base the management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) on several well-established resection criteria (RC), including cyst size. However, malignancy may occur in small cysts. Since branch-duct (BD) IPMN are not perfect spheres, volumetric and morphologic analysis might better correlate with mucin production and grade of dysplasia. Nonetheless, their role in malignancy (high-grade dysplasia/invasive cancer) prediction has been poorly investigated. Previous studies evaluating RC also included patients with solid-mass-forming pancreatic cancer (PC), which may affect the RC yield. This study aimed to assess the role of volume, morphology, and other well-established RC in malignancy prediction in patients with BD- and mixed-type IPMN after excluding solid masses.

METHODS

Retrospective ethical review-board-approved study of 106 patients (2008-2019) with histopathological diagnosis of BD- and mixed-type IPMN (without solid masses) and preoperative MRI available. Standard imaging and clinical features were collected, and the novel imaging features cyst-volume and elongation value [EV = 1 - (width/length)] calculated on T2-weighted images. Logistic regression analysis was performed. Statistical significance set at two-tails, p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Neither volume (odds ratio (OR) = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99-1.02, p = 0.12) nor EV (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.02-5.93, p = 0.49) was associated with malignancy. Contrast-enhancing mural nodules (MN), main pancreatic duct (MPD) ≥ 5 mm, and elevated carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 serum levels (> 37 μmol/L) were associated with malignancy (MN OR: 4.32, 95% CI: 1.18-15.76, p = 0.02; MPD ≥ 5 mm OR: 4.2, 95% CI: 1.34-13.1, p = 0.01; CA19-9 OR: 6.72; 95% CI: 1.89 - 23.89, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Volume and elongation value cannot predict malignancy in BD- and/or mixed-type IPMN. Mural nodules, MPD ≥ 5 mm and elevated CA19-9 serum levels are associated with higher malignancy risk even after the exclusion of solid masses.

KEY POINTS

• Novel and well-established resection criteria for IPMN have been evaluated after excluding solid masses. • BD-IPMN volume and elongation value cannot predict malignancy. • Main pancreatic duct ≥ 5 mm, mural nodules, and elevated carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels are associated with malignancy.

Pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: Current diagnosis and management

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) represent approximately 1% of all pancreatic neoplasms and 25% of cystic neoplasms. They are divided into three types: main duct-IPMN (MD-IPPMN), branch duct-IPMN (BD-IPMN), and mixed type-IPMN. In this review, diagnostics, including clinical presentation and radiological investigations, were described. Magnetic resonance imaging is the most useful for most IPMNs. Management depends on the type and radiological features of IPMNs. Surgery is recommended for MD-IPMN. For BD-IPMN, management involves surgery or surveillance depending on the tumor size, cyst growth rate, solid components, main duct dilatation, high-grade dysplasia in cytology, the presence of symptoms (jaundice, new-onset diabetes, pancreatitis), and CA 19.9 serum level. The patient’s age and comorbidities should also be taken into consideration. Currently, there are different guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of IPMNs. In this review, the following guidelines were presented: Sendai International Association of Pancreatology guidelines (2006), American Gastroenterological Association guidelines, revised international consensus Fukuoka guidelines (2012), revised international consensus Fukuoka guidelines (2017), and European evidence-based guidelines according to the European Study Group on Cystic Tumours of the Pancreas (2018). The Verona Evidence-Based Meeting 2020 was also presented and discussed.

Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of incidental pancreatic lesions are being detected each year. Accurate characterisation of pancreatic lesions into benign, precancerous, and cancer masses is crucial in deciding whether to use treatment or surveillance. Distinguishing benign lesions from precancerous and cancerous lesions can prevent patients from undergoing unnecessary major surgery. Despite the importance of accurately classifying pancreatic lesions, there is no clear algorithm for management of focal pancreatic lesions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of various imaging modalities in detecting cancerous and precancerous lesions in people with focal pancreatic lesions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index until 19 July 2016. We searched the references of included studies to identify further studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include studies reporting cross-sectional information on the index test (CT (computed tomography), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), PET (positron emission tomography), EUS (endoscopic ultrasound), EUS elastography, and EUS-guided biopsy or FNA (fine-needle aspiration)) and reference standard (confirmation of the nature of the lesion was obtained by histopathological examination of the entire lesion by surgical excision, or histopathological examination for confirmation of precancer or cancer by biopsy and clinical follow-up of at least six months in people with negative index tests) in people with pancreatic lesions irrespective of language or publication status or whether the data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently searched the references to identify relevant studies and extracted the data. We planned to use the bivariate analysis to calculate the summary sensitivity and specificity with their 95% confidence intervals and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) to compare the tests and assess heterogeneity, but used simpler models (such as univariate random-effects model and univariate fixed-effect model) for combining studies when appropriate because of the sparse data. We were unable to compare the diagnostic performance of the tests using formal statistical methods because of sparse data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 54 studies involving a total of 3,196 participants evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of various index tests. In these 54 studies, eight different target conditions were identified with different final diagnoses constituting benign, precancerous, and cancerous lesions. None of the studies was of high methodological quality. None of the comparisons in which single studies were included was of sufficiently high methodological quality to warrant highlighting of the results. For differentiation of cancerous lesions from benign or precancerous lesions, we identified only one study per index test. The second analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous versus benign lesions, provided three tests in which meta-analysis could be performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing cancer were: EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 1.00), specificity 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.00); EUS: sensitivity 0.95 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.99), specificity 0.53 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.74); PET: sensitivity 0.92 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.97), specificity 0.65 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84). The third analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous lesions from benign lesions, only provided one test (EUS-FNA) in which meta-analysis was performed. EUS-FNA had moderate sensitivity for diagnosing precancerous or cancerous lesions (sensitivity 0.73 (95% CI 0.01 to 1.00) and high specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.00), the extremely wide confidence intervals reflecting the heterogeneity between the studies). The fourth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (dysplasia) provided three tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing invasive carcinoma were: CT: sensitivity 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.87), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.97); EUS: sensitivity 0.78 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.94), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.98); EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.66 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.99), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.98). The fifth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) versus precancerous (low- or intermediate-grade dysplasia) provided six tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing cancer (high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) were: CT: sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.00 to 1.00), specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.00 to 1.00); EUS: sensitivity 0.86 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.92), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96); EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.47 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.00); EUS-FNA carcinoembryonic antigen 200 ng/mL: sensitivity 0.58 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.83), specificity 0.51 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.81); MRI: sensitivity 0.69 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.86), specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.00); PET: sensitivity 0.90 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.96), specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.99). The sixth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) provided no tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The seventh analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous (intermediate- or high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) provided two tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cancer were: CT: sensitivity 0.83 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.92), specificity 0.83 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.93) and MRI: sensitivity 0.80 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.92), specificity 0.81 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.95), respectively. The eighth analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous (intermediate- or high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) or benign lesions provided no test in which meta-analysis was performed.There were no major alterations in the subgroup analysis of cystic pancreatic focal lesions (42 studies; 2086 participants). None of the included studies evaluated EUS elastography or sequential testing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were unable to arrive at any firm conclusions because of the differences in the way that study authors classified focal pancreatic lesions into cancerous, precancerous, and benign lesions; the inclusion of few studies with wide confidence intervals for each comparison; poor methodological quality in the studies; and heterogeneity in the estimates within comparisons.

Advances in the diagnosis of cystic neoplasms of the pancreas

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms is challenging due to limitations of current diagnostic tests. There is considerable interest in developing an accurate and cost-effective diagnostic test (or panel of tests) to differentiate cyst types and to identify those which would benefit most from surgical resection.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current multidetector computed tomography scans may have improved accuracy to distinguish between mucinous and nonmucinous cysts. Attempts to generate quantitative criteria from cross-sectional imaging to differentiate cyst types have yielded mixed results. DNA mutations and microRNA show promise in the ability to distinguish between mucinous and nonmucinous cysts. Cyst fluid mucin glycoproteins and cytokines may identify those cysts with high malignant potential. Proteomic analysis may yield other biomarker candidates.

SUMMARY

Analysis of DNA mutations and proteins within pancreatic cyst fluid have identified potential biomarkers to aid with the management of patients with pancreatic cystic neoplasms.

Diagnostic and radiological management of cystic pancreatic lesions: important features for radiologists

Cystic pancreatic neoplasms are often an incidental finding, the frequency of which is increasing. The understanding of such lesions has increased in recent years, but the numerous types of lesions involved can hinder differential diagnosis. They include, in particular, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN), serous cystic neoplasms (SCN), and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN). Knowledge of their histological and radiological structure, as well as distribution in terms of localization, age, and sex, helps to differentiate such tumours from common pancreatic pseudocysts. Several types of cystic pancreatic neoplasms can undergo malignant transformation and, therefore, require differentiated radiological management. This review aims to develop a broader understanding of the pathological and radiological characteristics of cystic pancreatic neoplasms, and provide a guideline for everyday practice based on current concepts in the radiological management of the given lesions.