Chronic Pancreatitis or Pancreatic Tumor? A Problem-solving Approach

Diagnostic performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT in differentiating autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT in the non-invasive diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) and differentiating it from pancreatic cancer (CaP) based on the amount and pattern of FDG uptake, as well as involvement of extra-pancreatic sites.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. Only those studies that compared the findings of F-18 FDG PET/CT in terms of SUVmax, pattern of FDG uptake and presence of FDG-avid extra-pancreatic sites in both AIP and CaP were included. Studies were qualitatively assessed for risk of bias and publication bias. The diagnostic performance of parameters on PET/CT was examined through pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odd's ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies were included with a total of 580 patients. 178 patients had AIP (Age 18-90 years, male, M: female, F ratio-8.4:1) and 402 patients had CaP (Age 22-88 years, M:F ratio-1.5:1). Type of AIP was reported in only 3 studies, with the included cases predominantly being type 1 AIP. All studies were retrospective with heterogeneity and a risk on patient selection and index test. The FDG uptake, expressed as SUVmax, was lower in AIP with a weighted mean difference of -3.11 (95% confidence interval, CI: -5.28 to -0.94). To diagnose AIP, the pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR of diffuse pattern of FDG uptake were 0.59 (95% CI: 0.51-0.66), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86-0.92) and 21.07 (95% CI: 5.07-88.32), respectively, with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.717 on SROC analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR of FDG-avid extra pancreatic sites were 0.55 (95% CI: 0.45-0.65), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.52-0.64) and 2.33 (95% CI: 1.40-3.89), respectively, with an AUC of 0.632.

CONCLUSION

On F-18 FDG PET/CT, a pancreatic lesion of AIP has a lower SUVmax value than CaP. A diffuse pattern of FDG uptake and presence of an extra-pancreatic FDG-avid site are nearly 21 times and twice more likely in AIP than CaP, respectively.

Hidden in plain sight: commonly missed early signs of pancreatic cancer on CT

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has poor prognosis mostly due to the advanced stage at which disease is diagnosed. Early detection of disease at a resectable stage is, therefore, critical for improving outcomes of patients. Prior studies have demonstrated that pancreatic abnormalities may be detected on CT in up to 38% of CT studies 5 years before clinical diagnosis of PDAC. In this review, we highlight commonly missed signs of early PDAC on CT. Broadly, these commonly missed signs consist of small isoattenuating PDAC without contour deformity, isolated pancreatic duct dilatation and cutoff, focal pancreatic enhancement and focal parenchymal atrophy, pancreatitis with underlying PDAC, and vascular encasement. Through providing commentary on demonstrative examples of these signs, we demonstrate how to reduce the risk of missing or misinterpreting radiological features of early PDAC.

Endoscopic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Fine-Needle Aspiration or Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) are currently recommended for the pathologic diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions (PSLs). The application of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (ECEUS) could aid the endoscopist during an FNA and/or FNB procedure. CEUS is indeed able to better differentiate the pathologic tissue from the surrounding healthy pancreatic parenchyma and to detect necrotic areas and vessels.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to evaluate if ECEUS could reduce the number of needle passes and side effects and increase the diagnostic efficacy of FNA and/or FNB.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of clinical studies was performed to explore if ECEUS-FNA or FNB could increase diagnostic accuracy and reduce the number of needle passes and adverse effects compared to standard EUS-FNA or FNB. In accordance with the study protocol, a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the evidence was planned.

RESULTS

The proportion of established diagnoses of ECEUS was 90.9% compared to 88.3% of EUS, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.14). The diagnosis was made through a single step in 70.9% of ECEUS patients and in 65.3% of EUS patients, without statistical significance (p = 0.24). The incidence of adverse reactions was substantially comparable across both groups (p = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

ECEUS-FNA and FNB do not appear superior to standard EUS-FNA and FNB for the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions.

Revolutionizing the Pancreatic Tumor Diagnosis: Emerging Trends in Imaging Technologies: A Systematic Review

Background and Objectives: The pancreas, ensconced within the abdominal cavity, requires a plethora of sophisticated imaging modalities for its comprehensive evaluation, with ultrasonography serving as a primary investigative technique. A myriad of pancreatic pathologies, encompassing pancreatic neoplasia and a spectrum of inflammatory diseases, are detectable through these imaging strategies. Nevertheless, the intricate anatomical confluence and the pancreas's deep-seated topography render the visualization and accurate diagnosis of its pathologies a formidable endeavor. The objective of our paper is to review the best diagnostic imagistic tools for the pancreas. Materials and Methods: we have gathered several articles using Prisma guidelines to determine the best imagistic methods. The imperative of pancreatic scanning transcends its diagnostic utility, proving to be a pivotal element in a multitude of clinical specialties, notably surgical oncology. Within this domain, multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) of the pancreas holds the distinction of being the paramount imaging modality, endorsed for its unrivaled capacity to delineate the staging and progression of pancreatic carcinoma. In synergy with MDCT, there has been a notable advent of avant-garde imaging techniques in recent years. These advanced methodologies, including ultrasonography, endoscopic ultrasonography, contrast-enhanced ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) conjoined with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), have broadened the horizon of tumor characterization, offering unparalleled depth and precision in oncological assessment. Other emerging diagnostic techniques, such as elastography, also hold a lot of potential and promise for the future of pancreatic imaging. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) is a quick, minimally invasive procedure to evaluate lumps using a thin needle to extract tissue for analysis. It is less invasive than surgical biopsies and usually performed as an outpatient with quick recovery. Its accuracy depends on sample quality, and the risks include minimal bleeding or discomfort. Results, guiding further treatment, are typically available within a week. Elastography is a non-invasive medical imaging technique that maps the elastic properties and stiffness of soft tissue. This method, often used in conjunction with ultrasound or MRI, helps differentiate between hard and soft areas in tissue, providing valuable diagnostic information. It is particularly useful for assessing liver fibrosis, thyroid nodules, breast lumps, and musculoskeletal conditions. The technique is painless and involves applying gentle pressure to the area being examined. The resulting images show tissue stiffness, indicating potential abnormalities. Elastography is advantageous for its ability to detect diseases in early stages and monitor treatment effectiveness. The procedure is quick, safe, and requires no special preparation, with results typically available immediately. Results: The assembled and gathered data shows the efficacy of various techniques in discerning the nature and extent of neoplastic lesions within the pancreas. Conclusions: The most common imaging modalities currently used in diagnosing pancreatic neoplasms are multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), alongside new technologies, such as elastography.

Clinical value of endoscopic ultrasound sound speed in differential diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesion and prognosis of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Differential diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesion (PSL) and prognosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) is a clinical challenge. We aimed to explore the differential diagnostic value of sound speed (SS) obtained from endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in PSL and the prognostic value of SS in PC.

METHODS

Patients with PSL in The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University from March 2019 to October 2019 were prospectively enrolled, who obtained SS from PSL. Patients were divided into the PC group and the pancreatic benign lesion (PBL) group. SS1 is the SS of lesions and SS2 is the SS of normal tissues adjacent to lesions. Ratio1 is equal to SS1 divided by SS2 of PSL (ratio1 = SS1/SS2).

RESULTS

Eighty patients were enrolled (24 PBL patients, 56 PC patients). SS1 and ratio1 in PC group were higher compared with PBL group (SS1:1568.00 vs. 1550.00, Z = -2.066, p = 0.039; ratio1: 1.0110 vs. 1.0051, Z = -3.391, p = 0.001). The SS1 in PC (Z = -6.503, p < 0.001) was higher compared to SS2. In the nonsurgical group of PC, low ratio1 predicted high overall survival (OS) (7.000 months vs. 4.000 months; p = 0.039). In the surgical group of PC, low SS1 was associated with low median OS (4.000 months vs. 12.000 months; p = 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

SS plays a vital role in distinguishing between PBL and PC. Higher SS1 and ratio1 obtained by EUS are more related to PC than PBL. In PC patients, high SS1 may predict pancreatic lesions. In the nonsurgical group of PC, low ratio1 may predict high OS. However, in the surgical group of PC, low SS1 may predict low OS.

Incidental double duct sign: Should we be worried? Results from a long-term follow-up study

Backgrounds/Aims

Double duct sign (DDS) (dilated common bile and pancreatic duct) is synonymous with pancreatic head/peri-ampullary tumor (PHPAT). There is limited evidence on whether incidental DDS (I-DDS) is associated with an increased risk of malignancy. This study aimed to evaluate 5-year outcomes of I-DDS.

Methods

Patients were categorized according to their risk of malignancy. 'Low-risk' patients, including those with I-DDS between 2010 and 2015, were analyzed in this study. The primary outcome was incidence of PHPAT within five years of identification of DDS. Histology results from endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy were considered diagnostic. Secondary outcomes were incidence of benign causes, extent of follow-up investigations, and clinical indicators of malignancy in patients with DDS.

Results

Among 103 patients with DDS, 20 had I-DDS. Subsequent follow-up of these 20 patients found no patient with PHPAT, two (10%) patients with chronic pancreatitis, and 18 (90%) patients with no cause found. The median follow-up duration for 'low-risk' patients was 7.3 years (range, 6-11 years). The mean number of follow-up investigations per patient was two (range, 0-9). Investigations included computed tomography (n = 27), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (n = 23), endoscopy (n = 16), and ultrasound (n = 14). Patients with jaundice were more likely to have malignancy (p < 0.01). Those with abdominal pain were more likely to have a benign cause (p < 0.01). Hyperbilirubinemia and/or deranged liver enzymes and raised CA19-9 were more likely to be associated with PHPAT (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Patients with I-DDS have a low risk of developing PHPAT within five years.

The clinical characteristics of focal acute pancreatitis based on imaging diagnosis: comparison with non-localized acute pancreatitis- a preliminary result

BACKGROUND

Focal acute pancreatitis is a special type of acute pancreatitis, which diagnosis is based on image showing a focal mass formation in the pancreas. For acute pancreatitis with or without focal inflammatory enlargement, little is known on differences between them. Our purpose was to find differences between focal acute pancreatitis and non-localized acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of a total of 24 patients diagnosed with focal acute pancreatitis by imaging and clinical diagnosis, and 27 cases of acute pancreatitis which manifest non-localized pancreas inflammation were selected as the control group. The differences of the two groups were compared to describe their clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Differences in bloating (4.2% VS 29.6%,P = 0.026), abdominal tenderness (58.3% VS 85.2%,P = 0.032), peripheral blood neutrophil ratio (60.1 ± 23.3VS 75.9 ± 12.6,P = 0.004), serum D-Dimer (0.40(0.25,0.98) VS 1.59(0.49,4.63),P = 0.008), serum GGT (40(25,91) VS120(22,383),P = 0.046), serum amylase(435(241,718) VS 591(394,1333),P = 0.044) and lipase(988(648,1067) VS 1686(525,2675),P = 0.027) between focal acute pancreatitis and non-localized acute pancreatitis groups were statistically significant. However, difference of the severity of two groups was not statistically significant (P = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

Compared with non-localized acute pancreatitis, changes in symptoms, signs and laboratory indicators of focal acute pancreatitis are non-obvious, however, there was no significant difference in the severity of two groups, indicating that we should pay more attention to diagnosis of focal acute pancreatitis in clinical practice.

Pancreatic Cancer and Its Mimics

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common primary pancreatic malignancy, ranking fourth in cancer-related mortality in the United States. Typically, PDAC appears on images as a hypovascular mass with upstream pancreatic duct dilatation and abrupt duct cutoff, distal pancreatic atrophy, and vascular encasement, with metastatic involvement including lymphadenopathy. However, atypical manifestations that may limit detection of the underlying PDAC may also occur. Atypical PDAC features include findings related to associated conditions such as acute or chronic pancreatitis, a mass that is isointense to the parenchyma, multiplicity, diffuse tumor infiltration, associated calcifications, and cystic components. Several neoplastic and inflammatory conditions can mimic PDAC, such as paraduodenal "groove" pancreatitis, autoimmune pancreatitis, focal acute and chronic pancreatitis, neuroendocrine tumors, solid pseudopapillary neoplasms, metastases, and lymphoma. Differentiation of these conditions from PDAC can be challenging due to overlapping CT and MRI features; however, certain findings can help in differentiation. Diffusion-weighted MRI can be helpful but also can be nonspecific. Accurate diagnosis is pivotal for guiding therapeutic planning and potential outcomes in PDAC and avoiding biopsy or surgical treatment of some of these mimics. Biopsy may still be required for diagnosis in some cases. The authors describe the typical and atypical imaging findings of PDAC and features that may help to differentiate PDAC from its mimics. ©RSNA, 2023 Online supplemental material is available for this article. Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center. See the invited commentary by Zins in this issue.

Pancreatic tail cancer in the setting of pancreatitis with a review of the literature: A case report

Environmental risk factors for pancreatic cancer include acute and chronic pancreatitis, obesity, and tobacco use. Differentiating a pancreatic neoplasm in a patient with pancreatitis can be challenging due to their similar presentations. A 57-year-old African American man with a history of congestive heart failure, pancreatitis, and incomplete pancreas divisum presented with an epigastric abdominal pain that radiated to his back. Imaging showed necrotizing pancreatitis, a developing splenic infarct, and a mass at the pancreas tail. The patient was discharged with pain medications and was recommended follow-up imaging after resolution of his pancreatitis. He was readmitted to the emergency department 2 weeks later with recurrent acute abdominal pain. Computed tomography scan of abdomen and pelvis followed by magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasound revealed an infiltrative pancreatic tail mass. Biopsy of the mass confirmed a locally advanced pancreatic tail adenocarcinoma. Chronic pancreatitis is associated with pancreatic cancer. Practitioners should be aware of the co-existence of chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer, and the initial steps to evaluate a malignancy in chronic pancreatitis.

Pancreatic cancer, autoimmune or chronic pancreatitis, beyond tissue diagnosis: Collateral imaging and clinical characteristics may differentiate them

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal malignancies and is developing into the 2^nd leading cause of cancer-related death. Often, the clinical and radiological presentation of PDAC may be mirrored by other inflammatory pancreatic masses, such as autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) and mass-forming chronic pancreatitis (MFCP), making its diagnosis challenging. Differentiating AIP and MFCP from PDAC is vital due to significant therapeutic and prognostic implications. Current diagnostic criteria and tools allow the precise differentiation of benign from malignant masses; however, the diagnostic accuracy is imperfect. Major pancreatic resections have been performed in AIP cases under initial suspicion of PDAC after a diagnostic approach failed to provide an accurate diagnosis. It is not unusual that after a thorough diagnostic evaluation, the clinician is confronted with a pancreatic mass with uncertain diagnosis. In those cases, a re-evaluation must be entertained, preferably by an experienced multispecialty team including radiologists, pathologists, gastroenterologists, and surgeons, looking for disease-specific clinical, imaging, and histological hallmarks or collateral evidence that could favor a specific diagnosis. Our aim is to describe current diagnostic limitations that hinder our ability to reach an accurate diagnosis among AIP, PDAC, and MFCP and to highlight those disease-specific clinical, radiological, serological, and histological characteristics that could support the presence of any of these three disorders when facing a pancreatic mass with uncertain diagnosis after an initial diagnostic approach has been unsuccessful.

CA 19-9 but Not IGF-1/IGFBP-2 Is a Useful Biomarker for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and Chronic Pancreatitis (CP) Differentiation

INTRODUCTION

There are still no effective diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The differentiation between PDAC and chronic pancreatitis (CP) is often challenging. The inflammatory mass in the course of CP causes diagnostic difficulties in differentiating them from neoplastic lesions and, thus, delays the initiation of radical treatment. Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 2 (IGFBP-2) form a network involved in PDAC development. The role of IGFs in promoting pancreatic cancer cell proliferation, survival, and migration is well established, and their ability to stimulate tumor growth and metastasis is well documented. The aim of the study was to evaluate the usability of IGF-1, IGFBP-2, and IGF-1/IGFBP-2 ratio in PDAC and CP differentiation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 137 patients: 89 patients with PDAC and 48 patients with CP. All subjects were tested for the levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-2 using the ELISA method (Corgenix UK Ltd. R&D Systems), along with the level of CA 19-9 in serum. Additionally, the IGF-1/IGFBP-2 ratio was calculated. Further analyses used logit and probit models with varying determinants in order to discern between PDAC and CP patients. The models served as a basis for AUROC calculation.

RESULTS

The mean IGF-1 serum level was equal to 52.12 ± 33.13 ng/mL in PDAC vs. 74.23 ± 48.98 ng/mL in CP (p = 0.0053). The mean level of IGFBP-2 was equal to 305.95 ± 194.58 ng/mL in PDAC vs. 485.43 ± 299 ng/mL in CP (p = 0.0002). The mean CA 19-9 serum concentration was 434.95 ± 419.98 U/mL in PDAC vs. 78.07 ± 182.36 U/mL in CP (p = 0.0000). The mean IGF-1/IGFBP-2 ratio was 0.213 ± 0.14 in PDAC vs. 0.277 ± 0.33 in CP (p = 0.1914). The diagnostic usefulness of indicators for the purpose of PDAC and CP differentiation was assessed by means of AUROC comparison. The AUROCs of IGF-1, IGFBP-2, and IGF-1/IGFBP-2 ratio ranged below 0.7, being lower than the AUROC of CA 19-9 (0.7953; 0.719 within 95% CI). Together, the CA 19-9 and IGFBP-2 AUROCs also ranged below 0.8. When age was included, the AUROC increased to 0.8632, and its 95% confidence interval held above the 0.8 limit. The sensitivity of the used markers was not correlated to the stage of pancreatic PDAC.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented results indicate that CA 19-9 is a marker demonstrating high potential for PDAC and CP differentiation. The inclusion of additional variables into the model, such as the serum level of IGF-1 or IGFBP-2, slightly increased the sensitivity in differentiating CP from PDAC. The IGF-1/IGFBP-2 ratio turned out to be a good marker of pancreatic diseases, but insufficient for the purpose of CP and PDAC differentiation.

Ex‐vivo investigation of radiofrequency ablation in pancreatic adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Objective

Endoscopic ultrasound (US)‐guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been investigated for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) but studies are limited and heterogeneous. Computed tomography (CT) scan features may predict RFA response after chemotherapy but their role is unexplored. The primary aim was to investigate the efficacy of ex‐vivo application of a dedicated RFA system at three power on surgically resected PDAC in patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The secondary aim was to explore the association between pre‐treatment CT‐based quantitative features and RFA response.

Methods

Fifteen ex‐vivo PDAC samples were treated by RFA under US control at three power groups (10, 30, and 50 W). Short axis necrosis diameter was measured by two expert blinded pathologists as the primary outcome. Two radiologists independently reviewed preoperative CT images.

Results

Eighty percent of specimens showed coagulative necrosis consisting of few millimeters: 5.7 ± 3.9 mm at 10 W, 3.7 ± 2.2 mm at 30 W, and 3.5 ± 2.4 mm at 50 W (p = 0.3), without a significant correlation between power setting and mean necrosis short axis (rho = –0.28; p = 0.30). Good agreement was seen between pathologists (k = 0.76; 95% confidence interval 0.55–0.98). Logistic regression analysis did not show associations between CT features and RFA response.

Conclusions

RFA causes histologically evident damage with coagulative necrosis of a few millimeters in 80% of ex‐vivo PDAC samples after chemotherapy and no clinical or pre‐operative CT features can predict efficacy. Power settings do not correlate with the histological ablation area. These results are of relevance when employing RFA in vivo and planning clinical trials on its role in PDAC patients.

Anatomic and Functional Imaging of Immunoglobulin G4-related Disease and Its Mimics

Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)-related disease (IgG4-RD) is an immune-mediated fibrosclerosing disease with tumefactive lesions infiltrated by IgG4-positive plasma cells. Initially described as autoimmune pancreatitis, IgG4-RD is now recognized as a discrete entity and is found to affect virtually any organ in the body. Common extrapancreatic sites include the biliary tree, salivary glands, periorbital tissue, lungs, kidneys, lymph nodes, aorta, retroperitoneum, and thyroid gland. Diagnosis-which relies on histopathologic, serologic, and radiologic features-can be challenging with the disease underdiagnosed, as IgG4-RD often mimics malignancy, infectious processes, or other immune-mediated conditions. Patients may present with signs of compression of nearby structures due to mass effect or with organ failure when the disease is left untreated. The clinical course is complex, with single- or multiorgan involvement and metachronous or synchronous occurrence of lesions. IgG4-RD responds well to glucocorticoid therapy, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and B-cell-depleting biologic agents; prompt diagnosis is important to avoid delay in treatment and unnecessary pharmacologic or surgical intervention. While imaging features may not be specific for IgG4-RD, functional whole-body imaging with fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT is a useful adjunct for localizing extrapancreatic sites for biopsy, monitoring therapeutic response, and demonstrating disease relapse. The authors describe the pancreatic and extrapancreatic sites of involvement in IgG4-RD, with imaging features and patterns to aid in distinguishing IgG4-RD from its mimics through a multimodality approach with emphasis on functional imaging evaluation. ^©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions in the supplemental material and the slide presentation from the RSNA Annual Meeting are available for this article.

Thoracoabdominal manifestations of immunoglobulin G4-related disease

Immunoglobulin G4-related disease (IgG4-RD) comprises a group of immune-mediated diseases that, until recently, were considered separate entities. These entities have a similar clinical presentation, serological findings, and pathogenesis, so they are currently considered a single multisystemic disease. The common characteristic is the infiltration of involved tissues by plasma cells and lymphocytes that are positive for IgG4. Three major criteria have been proposed for the diagnosis of IgG4-RD: clinical, laboratory, and histological. The pancreas is the organ that is most affected by IgG4-RD, which can simulate a tumor. In this respect, a series of signs could help us suspect that the pancreatic findings do not reflect a tumor (halo sign, duct-penetrating sign, absence of vascular invasion, etc.). The differential diagnosis is important to avoid unnecessary surgical interventions.

Pancreatic Cancer in Chronic Pancreatitis: Pathogenesis and Diagnostic Approach

Chronic pancreatitis is one of the main risk factors for pancreatic cancer, but it is a rare event. Inflammation and oncogenes work hand in hand as key promoters of this disease. Tobacco is another co-factor. During alcoholic chronic pancreatitis, the cumulative risk of cancer is estimated at 4% after 15 to 20 years. This cumulative risk is higher in hereditary pancreatitis: 19 and 12% in the case of PRSS1 and SPINK1 mutations, respectively, at an age of 60 years. The diagnosis is difficult due to: (i) clinical symptoms of cancer shared with those of chronic pancreatitis; (ii) the parenchymal and ductal remodeling of chronic pancreatitis rendering imaging analysis difficult; and (iii) differential diagnoses, such as pseudo-tumorous chronic pancreatitis and paraduodenal pancreatitis. Nevertheless, the occurrence of cancer during chronic pancreatitis must be suspected in the case of back pain, weight loss, unbalanced diabetes, and jaundice, despite alcohol withdrawal. Imaging must be systematically reviewed. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy can contribute by targeting suspicious tissue areas with the help of molecular biology (search for KRAS, TP53, CDKN2A, DPC4 mutations). Short-term follow-up of patients is necessary at the clinical and paraclinical levels to try to diagnose cancer at a surgically curable stage. Pancreatic surgery is sometimes necessary if there is any doubt.

Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) MASTER: A novel deep learning-based system in pancreatic mass diagnosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Distinguishing pancreatic cancer from nonneoplastic masses is critical and remains a clinical challenge. The study aims to construct a deep learning-based artificial intelligence system to facilitate pancreatic mass diagnosis, and to guide EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in real time.

METHODS

This is a prospective study. The CH-EUS MASTER system is composed of Model 1 (real-time capture and segmentation) and Model 2 (benign and malignant identification). It was developed using deep convolutional neural networks and Random Forest algorithm. Patients with pancreatic masses undergoing CH-EUS examinations followed by EUS-FNA were recruited. All patients underwent CH-EUS and were diagnosed both by endoscopists and CH-EUS MASTER. After diagnosis, they were randomly assigned to undergo EUS-FNA with or without CH-EUS MASTER guidance.

RESULTS

Compared with manual labeling by experts, the average overlap rate of Model 1 was 0.708. In the independent CH-EUS video testing set, Model 2 generated an accuracy of 88.9% in identifying malignant tumors. In clinical trial, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for diagnosing pancreatic masses by CH-EUS MASTER were significantly better than that of endoscopists. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were respectively 93.8%, 90.9%, 100%, 100%, and 83.3% by CH-EUS MASTER guided EUS-FNA, and were not significantly different compared to the control group. CH-EUS MASTER-guided EUS-FNA significantly improved the first-pass diagnostic yield.

CONCLUSION

CH-EUS MASTER is a promising artificial intelligence system diagnosing malignant and benign pancreatic masses and may guide FNA in real time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04607720.

Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopic Ultrasound for Pancreatic Cancer: Where Are We Now and What Does the Future Entail?

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In the United States (US), the overall 5-year relative survival rate for pancreatic cancer during the 2012-2018 period was 11.5%. However, the cancer stage at diagnosis strongly influences relative survival in these patients. Per the National Cancer Institute (NCI) statistics for 2012-2018, the 5-year relative survival rate for patients with localized disease was 43.9%, while it was 3.1% for patients with distant metastasis. The poor survival rates are primarily due to the late development of clinical signs and symptoms. Hence, early diagnosis is critical in improving treatment outcomes. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has gained immense popularity in gastroenterology. AI-assisted endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) models have been touted as a breakthrough in the early detection of pancreatic cancer. These models may also accurately differentiate pancreatic cancer from chronic pancreatitis and autoimmune pancreatitis, which mimics pancreatic cancer on radiological imaging. In this review, we detail the application of AI-assisted EUS models for pancreatic cancer detection. We also highlight the utility of AI-assisted EUS models in differentiating pancreatic cancer from radiological mimickers. Furthermore, we discuss the current limitations and future applications of AI technology in EUS for pancreatic cancers.

Standardization of MRI Screening and Reporting in Individuals With Elevated Risk of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Consensus Statement of the PRECEDE Consortium

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most aggressive malignancies, with a dismal survival rate. Screening the general population for early detection of PDAC is not recommended, but because early detection improves survival, high-risk individuals, defined as those meeting criteria based on a family history of PDAC and/or the presence of known pathogenic germline variant genes with PDAC risk, are recommended to undergo screening with MRI and/or endoscopic ultrasound at regular intervals. The Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection (PRECEDE) Consortium was formed in 2018 and is composed of gastroenterologists, geneticists, pancreatic surgeons, radiologists, statisticians, and researchers from 40 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia. The overarching goal of the PRECEDE Consortium is to facilitate earlier diagnosis of PDAC for high-risk individuals to increase survival of the disease. A standardized MRI protocol and reporting template are needed to enhance the quality of screening examinations, improve consistency of clinical management, and facilitate multiinstitutional research. We present a consensus statement to standardize MRI screening and reporting for individuals with elevated risk of pancreatic cancer.

Independent Validation and Assay Standardization of Improved Metabolic Biomarker Signature to Differentiate Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma From Chronic Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cancer (PDAC) is a highly lethal malignancy requiring efficient detection when the primary tumor is still resectable. We previously developed the MxPancreasScore comprising 9 analytes and serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), achieving an accuracy of 90.6%. The necessity for 5 different analytical platforms and multiple analytical runs, however, hindered clinical applicability. We therefore aimed to develop a simpler single-analytical run, single-platform diagnostic signature.

METHODS

We evaluated 941 patients (PDAC, 356; chronic pancreatitis [CP], 304; nonpancreatic disease, 281) in 3 multicenter independent tests, and identification (ID) and validation cohort 1 (VD1) and 2 (VD2) were evaluated. Targeted quantitative plasma metabolite analysis was performed on a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry platform. A machine learning-aided algorithm identified an improved (i-Metabolic) and minimalistic metabolic (m-Metabolic) signatures, and compared them for performance.

RESULTS

The i-Metabolic Signature, (12 analytes plus CA19-9) distinguished PDAC from CP with area under the curve (95% confidence interval) of 97.2% (97.1%-97.3%), 93.5% (93.4%-93.7%), and 92.2% (92.1%-92.3%) in the ID, VD1, and VD2 cohorts, respectively. In the VD2 cohort, the m-Metabolic signature (4 analytes plus CA19-9) discriminated PDAC from CP with a sensitivity of 77.3% and specificity of 89.6%, with an overall accuracy of 82.4%. For the subset of 45 patients with PDAC with resectable stages IA-IIB tumors, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 73.2%, 89.6%, and 82.7%, respectively; for those with detectable CA19-9 >2 U/mL, 81.6%, 88.7%, and 84.5%, respectively; and for those with CA19-9 <37 U/mL, 39.7%, 94.1%, and 76.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The single-platform, single-run, m-Metabolic signature of just 4 metabolites used in combination with serum CA19-9 levels is an innovative accurate diagnostic tool for PDAC at the time of clinical presentation, warranting further large-scale evaluation.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of solid pancreatic head lesions: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic head lesions (SPHL).

METHODS

This prospective study comprised consecutive patients with SPHL who underwent CEUS evaluation of the pancreas. Findings recorded at CEUS were enhancement patterns (degree, completeness, centripetal enhancement, and percentage enhancement) and presence of central vessels. In addition, time to peak (TTP) and washout time (WT) were recorded. The final diagnosis was based on histopathology or cytology. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify parameters that were significantly associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients (median age 53.8 years, 59 males) were evaluated. The final diagnosis was PDAC (n = 64, 65.3%), inflammatory mass (n = 16, 16.3%), neuroendocrine tumor (NET, n = 14, 14.3%), and other tumors (n = 4, 4.1%). Hypoenhancement, incomplete enhancement, and centripetal enhancement were significantly more common in PDAC than non-PDAC lesions (p = 0.001, p = 0.031, and p = 0.002, respectively). Central vessels were present in a significantly greater number of non-PDAC lesions (p = 0.0001). Hypoenhancement with < 30% enhancement at CEUS had sensitivity and specificity of 80.6% and 67.7%, respectively, for PDAC. There was no significant difference in the TTP and WT between PDAC and non - PDAC lesions. However, the WT was significantly shorter in PDAC compared to NET (p = 0.011). In multivariate analysis, lack of central vessels was significantly associated with a PDAC diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

CEUS is a useful tool for the evaluation of SPHL. CEUS can be incorporated into the diagnostic algorithm to differentiate PDAC from non-PDAC lesions.

KEY POINTS

• Hypoenhancement and incomplete enhancement at CEUS were significantly more common in PDAC than in non-PDAC. • Central vessels at CEUS were significantly associated with PDAC. • There was no difference in TTP and WT between PDAC and non-PDAC lesions.

Mass-Forming Chronic Pancreatitis: Diagnostic Performance of PET/CT

Mass-forming chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma are most commonly located in the head of pancreas, and there is a marked overlap in clinical features and imaging findings that makes it diagnostically challenging, although prognosis and management of both these entities differ. Differentiation is made even more difficult when surgical exploratory biopsy is obtained. Radical surgical resection remains the standard of care for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and conservative treatment is effective for mass-forming chronic pancreatitis. Misdiagnosis of mass-forming chronic pancreatitis as pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma results in unnecessary surgical intervention, and misdiagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma as mass-forming chronic pancreatitis results in delay in surgical intervention when required. Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography can reliably be used for tissue characterization of mass-forming chronic pancreatitis and for monitoring disease response following treatment. Although differentiation of mass-like lesions of pancreas is reliably made on histopathology, significant false-negative rate is a major drawback that has a negative effect on diagnosis. This case report describes a rare presentation of mass-forming chronic pancreatitis with florid dystrophic calcifications in a 60-year-old male.

Two nomograms for differentiating mass-forming chronic pancreatitis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in patients with chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate a CT nomogram and a radiomics nomogram to differentiate mass-forming chronic pancreatitis (MFCP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP).

METHODS

In this retrospective study, the data of 138 patients with histopathologically diagnosed MFCP or PDAC treated at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. Two radiologists analyzed the original cross-sectional CT images based on predefined criteria. Image segmentation, feature extraction, and feature reduction and selection were used to create the radiomics model. The CT and radiomics models were developed using data from a training cohort of 103 consecutive patients. The models were validated in 35 consecutive patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to develop a model for the differential diagnosis of MFCP and PDAC and visualized as a nomogram. The nomograms' performances were determined based on their differentiating ability and clinical utility.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 53.7 years, 75.4% were male. The CT nomogram showed good differentiation between the two entities in the training (area under the curve [AUC], 0.87) and validation (AUC, 0.94) cohorts. The radiomics nomogram showed good differentiation in the training (AUC, 0.91) and validation (AUC, 0.93) cohorts. Decision curve analysis showed that patients could benefit from the CT and radiomics nomograms, if the threshold probability was 0.05-0.85 and > 0.05, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The two nomograms reasonably accurately differentiated MFCP from PDAC in patients with CP and hold potential for refining the management of pancreatic masses in CP patients.

KEY POINTS

• A CT nomogram and a computed tomography-based radiomics nomogram reasonably accurately differentiated mass-forming chronic pancreatitis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP). • The two nomograms can monitor the cancer risk in patients with CP and hold promise to optimize the management of pancreatic masses in patients with CP.

Pancreatic Neoplasms: CT Evaluation of the Uncommon Presentations of Common Lesions and Common Presentations of the Uncommon Lesions!

Pancreatic masses are commonly encountered entities in radiology practice. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are the commonest pancreatic malignancies that typically present as infiltrative hypodense focal masses in the pancreatic head, which are hypoattenuating to the pancreatic parenchyma on pancreatic parenchymal and venous phases. However, there are various atypical imaging features of PDACs that create a diagnostic dilemma like tumor in body or tail, diffuse glandular involvement, isoattenuating tumors, cystic changes, or calcifications. Also, few relatively uncommon pancreatic malignancies like pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, cystic pancreatic tumors, pancreatic lymphoma, and pancreatic metastases present with overlapping features. Accurate radiological characterization of pancreatic masses is important for optimal management and prognostication. Thus, it is imperative for radiologists to be aware of all the uncommon presentations of common pancreatic lesions and common presentations of uncommon pancreatic lesions to avoid erroneous interpretations and establishing the correct diagnosis.

A systematic review of radiomics in pancreatitis: applying the evidence level rating tool for promoting clinical transferability

Background

Multiple tools have been applied to radiomics evaluation, while evidence rating tools for this field are still lacking. This study aims to assess the quality of pancreatitis radiomics research and test the feasibility of the evidence level rating tool.

Results

Thirty studies were included after a systematic search of pancreatitis radiomics studies until February 28, 2022, via five databases. Twenty-four studies employed radiomics for diagnostic purposes. The mean ± standard deviation of the adherence rate was 38.3 ± 13.3%, 61.3 ± 11.9%, and 37.1 ± 27.2% for the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS), the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist, and the Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative (IBSI) guideline for preprocessing steps, respectively. The median (range) of RQS was 7.0 (− 3.0 to 18.0). The risk of bias and application concerns were mainly related to the index test according to the modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. The meta-analysis on differential diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis versus pancreatic cancer by CT and mass-forming pancreatitis versus pancreatic cancer by MRI showed diagnostic odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of, respectively, 189.63 (79.65–451.48) and 135.70 (36.17–509.13), both rated as weak evidence mainly due to the insufficient sample size.

Conclusions

More research on prognosis of acute pancreatitis is encouraged. The current pancreatitis radiomics studies have insufficient quality and share common scientific disadvantages. The evidence level rating is feasible and necessary for bringing the field of radiomics from preclinical research area to clinical stage.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-022-01279-4.

Pancreaticoduodenal Groove: Spectrum of Disease and Imaging Features

The pancreaticoduodenal groove (PDG) is a small space between the pancreatic head and duodenum where vital interactions between multiple organs and physiologic processes take place. Muscles, nerves, and hormones perform a coordinated dance, allowing bile and pancreatic enzymes to aid in digestion and absorption of critical nutrition. Given the multitude of organs and cells working together, a variety of benign and malignant entities can arise in or adjacent to this space. Management of lesions in this region is also complex and can involve observation, endoscopic resection, or challenging surgeries such as the Whipple procedure. The radiologist plays an important role in evaluation of abnormalities involving the PDG. While CT is usually the first-line examination for evaluation of this complex region, MRI offers complementary information. Although features of abnormalities involving the PDG can often overlap, understanding the characteristic imaging and pathologic features generally allows categorization of disease entities based on the suspected organ of origin and the presence of ancillary features. The goal of the authors is to provide radiologists with a conceptual approach to entities implicating the PDG to increase the accuracy of diagnosis and assist in appropriate management or presurgical planning. They briefly discuss the anatomy of the PDG, followed by a more in-depth presentation of the features of disease categories. A table summarizing the entities that occur in this region by underlying cause and anatomic location is provided. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Radiomics and Its Applications and Progress in Pancreatitis: A Current State of the Art Review

Radiomics involves high-throughput extraction and analysis of quantitative information from medical images. Since it was proposed in 2012, there are some publications on the application of radiomics for (1) predicting recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), clinical severity of acute pancreatitis (AP), and extrapancreatic necrosis in AP; (2) differentiating mass-forming chronic pancreatitis (MFCP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), focal autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) from PDAC, and functional abdominal pain (functional gastrointestinal diseases) from RAP and chronic pancreatitis (CP); and (3) identifying CP and normal pancreas, and CP risk factors and complications. In this review, we aim to systematically summarize the applications and progress of radiomics in pancreatitis and it associated situations, so as to provide reference for related research.

Basic pancreatic lesions: Radiologic-pathologic correlation

The basic pancreatic lesions include location, size, shape, number, capsule, calcification/calculi, hemorrhage, cystic degeneration, fibrosis, pancreatic duct alterations, and microvessel. One or more basic lesions form a kind of pancreatic disease. As recognizing the characteristic imaging features of pancreatic basic lesions and their relationships with pathology aids in differentiating the variety of pancreatic diseases. The purpose of this study is to review the pathological and imaging features of the basic pancreatic lesions.

CT Radiomics Features in Differentiation of Focal-Type Autoimmune Pancreatitis from Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the radiomics score (rad-score) for differentiating focal-type autoimmune pancreatitis (fAIP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

This retrospective review included 42 consecutive patients with fAIP diagnosed according to the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria between January 2011 and December 2018. Furthermore, 334 consecutive patients with PDAC confirmed by pathology were also reviewed during the same period. Patients with PDAC and fAIP were matched via propensity score matching (PSM). All patients underwent multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). For each patient, 1409 radiomics features of the portal phase were extracted and reduced using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression algorithm. The portal rad-score performance was assessed based on its discriminative ability.

RESULTS

After PSM, we matched 55 patients with PDAC to 42 patients with fAIP, based on clinical and CT characteristics (e.g., patient age, sex, body mass index, location, size, enhanced mode). A rad-score for discriminating fAIP from PDAC, which contained four CT derived radiomic features, was developed (area under the curve = 0.97). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the radiomics model were 95.24%, 92.73% and 0.94, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The portal rad-score can accurately and noninvasively differentiate fAIP from PDAC.

Alpha Smooth Muscle Actin (αSMA) Immunohistochemistry Use in the Differentiation of Pancreatic Cancer from Chronic Pancreatitis

Aim: Fibrosis is observed both in pancreatic cancer (PDAC) and chronic pancreatitis (CP). The main cells involved in fibrosis are pancreatic stellate cells (PSCs), which activate alpha smooth muscle actin (αSMA), which is considered to be the best-known fibrosis marker. The aim of the study was to evaluate the expression of the αSMA in patients with PDAC and CP as the possible differentiation marker. Methods: We enrolled 114 patients undergoing pancreatic resection: 83 with PDAC and 31 with CP. Normal fragments of resected specimen from 21 patients represented the control tissue. The immunoexpressions of αSMA were detected in tissue specimens with immunohistochemistry (Abcam antibodies, GB). Results: Mean cytoplasmatic expression of αSMA protein in PDAC stromal cells was significantly higher compared to CP: 2.42 ± 0.37 vs 1.95 ± 0.45 (p < 0.01) and control group 0.61 ± 0.45 (p < 0.01). Strong immunoexpression of the αSMA protein was found in the vast majority (80.7%) of patients with PDAC, in about half (58%) of patients with CP, and not at all in healthy tissue. The expression of αSMA of different intensity was found in all patients with PDAC and CP, while in healthy tissue was minimal or absent. In PDAC patients, αSMA expression was significantly higher in tumors of diameter higher than 3 cm compared to smaller ones (p = 0.017). Conclusions: Presented findings confirm the significant role of fibrosis in both PDAC and CP; however, they do not confirm the role of αSMA as a marker of differentiation.

CGAT: Cell Graph ATtention Network for Grading of Pancreatic Disease Histology Images

Early detection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC), one of the most aggressive malignancies of the pancreas, is crucial to avoid metastatic spread to other body regions. Detection of pancreatic cancer is typically carried out by assessing the distribution and arrangement of tumor and immune cells in histology images. This is further complicated due to morphological similarities with chronic pancreatitis (CP), and the co-occurrence of precursor lesions in the same tissue. Most of the current automated methods for grading pancreatic cancers rely on extensive feature engineering involving accurate identification of cell features or utilising single number spatially informed indices for grading purposes. Moreover, sophisticated methods involving black-box approaches, such as neural networks, do not offer insights into the model's ability to accurately identify the correct disease grade. In this paper, we develop a novel cell-graph based Cell-Graph Attention (CGAT) network for the precise classification of pancreatic cancer and its precursors from multiplexed immunofluorescence histology images into the six different types of pancreatic diseases. The issue of class imbalance is addressed through bootstrapping multiple CGAT-nets, while the self-attention mechanism facilitates visualization of cell-cell features that are likely responsible for the predictive capabilities of the model. It is also shown that the model significantly outperforms the decision tree classifiers built using spatially informed metric, such as the Morisita-Horn (MH) indices.

Multimodel magnetic resonance imaging of mass-forming autoimmune pancreatitis: differential diagnosis with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

To assess the value of the multimodel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including unenhanced images, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI), MR-cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), in differentiation of mass-forming autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Twelve patients with mass-forming AIP and 30 with PDAC were included. All patients underwent unenhanced MRI, DCE-MRI, DWI, and MRCP. Relevant values including sensitivity and specificity of the imaging features and their diagnostic performance for predicting mass-forming AIP were analyzed.

RESULTS

Several statistically significant MR findings and quantitative indexes differentiating mass-forming AIP from PDAC, including multiplicity, irregularity or conformation, capsule-like rim enhancement, absence of internal cystic or necrotic portion, homogeneous enhancement during pancreatic, venous, and delayed phases, skipped stricture or stricture of MPD, absence of side branch dilation, maximum upstream MPD diameter < 2.4 mm, ContrastUP > 0.739, ContrastAP > 0.710, ContrastPP > 0.879, and ContrastVP or ContrastDP > 0.949, indicated mass-forming AIP (P < 0.05). The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value was also significantly lower in mass-forming AIP compared to that in PDAC (P = 0.006). The cutoff value of ADC for distinguishing mass-forming AIP from PDAC was 1.099 × 10-3 mm2/s.

CONCLUSION

Multimodel MRI, including unenhanced MRI, DCE-MRI with DWI and MRCP can provide qualitative and quantitative information about mass-forming AIP characterization. Multimodel MRI are valuable for differentiating mass-forming AIP from PDAC.

Utility of CT to Differentiate Pancreatic Parenchymal Metastasis from Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Simple Summary

The purpose of this retrospective study was to report the computed tomography (CT) features of pancreatic parenchymal metastasis (PPM) and identify CT features that may help discriminate between PPM and PDAC. At multivariable analysis, well-defined margins (OR, 6.64; 95% CI: 1.47–29.93; p = 0.014), maximal enhancement during arterial phase (OR, 6.15; 95% CI: 1.13–33.51; p = 0.036), no vessel involvement (OR, 7.19; 95% CI: 1.51–34.14) and no Wirsung duct dilatation (OR, 10.63; 95% CI: 2.27–49.91) were independently associated with PPM. A nomogram based on CT features identified at multivariable analysis yielded an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85–0.98) for the diagnosis of PPM vs. PDAC.

Abstract

Purpose: To report the computed tomography (CT) features of pancreatic parenchymal metastasis (PPM) and identify CT features that may help discriminate between PPM and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Materials and methods: Thirty-four patients (24 men, 12 women; mean age, 63.3 ± 10.2 [SD] years) with CT and histopathologically proven PPM were analyzed by two independent readers and compared to 34 patients with PDAC. Diagnosis performances of each variable for the diagnosis of PPM against PDAC were calculated. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. A nomogram was developed to diagnose PPM against PDAC. Results: PPM mostly presented as single (34/34; 100%), enhancing (34/34; 100%), solid (27/34; 79%) pancreatic lesion without visible associated lymph nodes (24/34; 71%) and no Wirsung duct enlargement (29/34; 85%). At multivariable analysis, well-defined margins (OR, 6.64; 95% CI: 1.47–29.93; p = 0.014), maximal enhancement during arterial phase (OR, 6.15; 95% CI: 1.13–33.51; p = 0.036), no vessel involvement (OR, 7.19; 95% CI: 1.512–34.14) and no Wirsung duct dilatation (OR, 10.63; 95% CI: 2.27–49.91) were independently associated with PPM. The nomogram yielded an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85–0.98) for the diagnosis of PPM vs. PDAC. Conclusion: CT findings may help discriminate between PPM and PDAC.

Pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer: A case of the chicken or the egg

Acute pancreatitis (AP), chronic pancreatitis (CP) and pancreatic cancer are three distinct pancreatic diseases with different prognoses and treatment options. However, it may be difficult to differentiate between benign and malignant disease. AP may be a first symptom of pancreatic cancer, particularly in patients between the ages of 56 and 75 with presumed idiopathic AP who had a concomitant diagnosis of new-onset diabetes mellitus or patients who present with CP at diagnosis of AP. In these patients, additional imaging is warranted, preferably by endoscopic ultrasonography. CP may lead to pancreatic cancer through oncogenic mutations, mostly in patients with hereditary CP, and in patients in whom risk factors for pancreatic cancer (e.g., nicotine and alcohol abuse) are also present. Patients with PRSS1-mediated CP and patients with a history of autosomal dominant hereditary CP without known genetic mutations may be considered for surveillance for pancreatic cancer. Pancreatic inflammation may mimic pancreatic cancer by appearing as a focal mass-forming lesion on imaging. Differentiation between the above mentioned benign and malignant disease may be facilitated by specific features like the duct-penetrating sign and the duct-to-parenchyma ratio. Research efforts are aimed towards developing a superior discriminant between pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer in the form of imaging modalities or biomarkers. This may aid clinicians in timely diagnosing pancreatic cancer in a potentially curable stage.

Imaging of inflammatory disease of the pancreas

Increasingly acute and chronic pancreatitis (AP and CP) are considered a continuum of a single entity. Nonetheless, if, after flare-up, the pancreas shows no residual inflammation, it is classified as AP. CP is characterised by a long cycle of worsening and waning glandular inflammation without the pancreas ever returning to its baseline structure or function. According to the International Consensus Guidelines on Early Chronic Pancreatitis, pancreatic inflammation must last at least 6 months before it can be labelled CP. The distinction is important because, unlike AP, CP can destroy endocrine and exocrine pancreatic function, emphasising the importance of early diagnosis. As typical AP can be diagnosed by clinical symptoms plus laboratory tests, imaging is usually reserved for those with recurrent, complicated or CP. Imaging typically starts with ultrasound and more frequently with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT). MRI and/or MR cholangiopancreatography can be used as a problem-solving tool to confirm indirect signs of pancreatic mass, differentiate between solid and cystic lesions, and to exclude pancreatic duct anomalies, as may occur with recurrent AP, or to visualise early signs of CP. MR cholangiopancreatography has replaced diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, ERCP, and/or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) remain necessary for transpapillary biliary or pancreatic duct stenting and transgastric cystic fluid drainage or pancreatic tissue sampling, respectively. Finally, positron emission tomography-MRI or positron emission tomography-CT are usually reserved for complicated cases and/or to search for extra pancreatic systemic manifestations. In this article, we discuss a broad spectrum of inflammatory pancreatic disorders and the utility of various modalities in diagnosing acute and chronic pancreatitis.

Role of dual-point 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, in patients with and without concomitant chronic pancreatitis: Comparison with CECT and EUS

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of dual-time-point-PET/CT, CECT and EUS + FNA in diagnosing pancreatic-ductal-adenocarcinomas (PDAC), in context of concomitant Chronic Pancreatitis (CP).

METHODS

18F-FDG-PET/CTs were prospectively acquired in 22 confirmed CP and 23 confirmed PDAC patients (calculated for 90% power); and cut-offs of 2.2 for early-SUV(∼1hr), 2.4 for delayed-SUV(∼3hr) and 1.36 for Retention-index (RI), were derived. These cut-offs were validated in PET/CTs of 75 patients (51.9 ± 13.3years; 54 men) with pancreatic masses of unknown nature. Comparisons were made with triple-phase-CECT (73 patients) and EUS + FNA (54 patients). Histopathology was obtained in 68 patients (including all PDACs) and 7 were followed up for minimum of 2 years.

RESULTS

In patients without concomitant CP, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing malignancy in standard-acquisition-PET/CT, dual-time-point-PET/CT, CECT and EUS + FNA were 97.4%, 83.3%, 94.0%; 97.4%, 75.0%, 92%; 94.6%, 66.7%, 87.8% and 92.6%, 88.9%, 91.7% respectively. Corresponding values in patients with concomitant CP were 88.9%, 57.1%, 80.0%; 100%, 57.1%, 88%; 82.4%, 57.1%, 75% and 100%, 100%, 100% respectively. In lesions ≤2 cm (AJCC-T1), dual-time-point-PET/CT was the most sensitive (95.8%). ROC-analysis revealed significantly higher area-under-the-curve for RI over early-SUV (p = 0.002) in cases with concomitant CP only. In patients with confirmed liver-metastases, PET/CT and CECT identified 15/16 and 13/16 lesions. PET/CT identified additional lung-metastases in 3 and bone-metastasis in one patient.

CONCLUSION

In patients without concomitant CP and with larger lesions, PET/CT and CECT are equivocal as screening modalities, with no benefit of dual-time-point-PET/CT acquisitions. However, in patients with concomitant CP and smaller lesions, dual-time-point PET/CT is better; with sensitivity comparable to EUS + FNA.

[Chronic pancreatitis : Characterization and differentiation from pancreatic cancer]

Klinisches/methodisches Problem

Bei der chronischen Pankreatitis (CP) handelt es sich um eine langanhaltende Entzündung der Bauchspeicheldrüse, welche die normale Struktur und Funktion des Organs schädigt. Das breite Spektrum an entzündlichen Pankreaserkrankungen umfasst einzelne Entitäten, wie die fokale Pankreatitis (FP) oder den Pseudotumor („mass-forming pancreatitis“), welche radiomorphologisch ein Adenokarzinom der Bauchspeicheldrüse (PDAC) nachahmen können. In weiterer Folge kann eine Fehldiagnose zu einem vermeidbaren und unnötigen operativen Eingriff oder zu einer Therapieverzögerung führen.

Radiologische Standardverfahren

Der Ultraschall (US) ist das primäre bildgebende Verfahren zur Abklärung von Pankreaserkrankungen, gefolgt von kontrastmittelverstärkter Computertomographie (KM-CT), die als meistverwendete Methode bei der diagnostischen Abklärung von Bauchspeicheldrüsenerkrankungen gilt. Die Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT) und/oder die MR-Cholangiopankreatographie (MRCP) können als Problemlöser eingesetzt werden, um zwischen soliden und zystischen Läsionen zu unterscheiden sowie auch Anomalien der Pankreasgänge auszuschließen, welche bei rezidivierender akuter Pankreatitis (AP) vorhanden sein können, oder um frühe Anzeichen einer CP zu visualisieren. Die MRCP hat dabei die diagnostische endoskopische retrograde Cholangiopankreatographie (ERCP) in der Abklärung von therapeutischen Interventionen im Wesentlichen ersetzt.

Empfehlung für die Praxis

Folgender Übersichtsartikel fasst die relevanten Merkmale in der Computertomographie (CT) und MRT zusammen, um eine akkurate, frühzeitige Diagnose einer CP zu stellen und eine Differenzierung zwischen FP und Pankreaskarzinom zu ermöglichen, um somit – auch in schwierigen Fällen – ein adäquates Therapiemanagement zu gewährleisten.

New advances in CT imaging of pancreas diseases: a narrative review

Computed tomography (CT) plays a pivotal role as a diagnostic tool in many diagnostic and diffuse pancreatic diseases. One of the major limits of CT is related to the radiation exposure of young patients undergoing repeated examinations. Besides the standard CT protocol, the most recent technological advances, such as low-voltage acquisitions with high performance X-ray tubes and iterative reconstructions, allow for significant optimization of the protocol with dose reduction. The variety of CT tools are further expanded by the introduction of dual energy: the production of energy-selective images (i.e., virtual monochromatic images) improves the image contrast and lesion detection while the material-selective images (e.g., iodine maps or virtual unenhanced images) are valuable for lesion detection and dose reduction. The perfusion techniques provide diagnostic and prognostic information lesion and parenchymal vascularization and interstitium. Both dual energy and perfusion CT have the potential for pushing the limits of conventional CT from morphological evaluation to quantitative imaging applied to inflammatory and oncological diseases. Advances in post-processing of CT images, such as pancreatic volumetry, texture analysis and radiomics provide relevant information for pancreatic function but also for the diagnosis, management and prognosis of pancreatic neoplasms. Artificial intelligence is promising for optimization of the workflow in qualitative and quantitative analyses. Finally, basic concepts on the role of imaging on screening of pancreatic diseases will be provided.

Factors associated with missed and misinterpreted cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively examine US, CT, and MR imaging examinations of missed or misinterpreted pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and identify factors which may have confounded detection or interpretation.

METHODS

We reviewed 107 examinations in 66/257 patients (26%, mean age 73.7 years) diagnosed with PDAC in 2014 and 2015, with missed or misinterpreted imaging findings as determined by a prior study. For each patient, images and reports were independently reviewed by two radiologists, and in consensus, the following factors which may have confounded assessment were recorded: inherent tumor factors, concurrent pancreatic pathology, technical limitations, and cognitive biases. Secondary signs of PDAC associated with each examination were recorded and compared with the original report to determine which findings were missed.

RESULTS

There were 66/107 (62%) and 49/107 (46%) cases with missed and misinterpreted imaging findings, respectively. A significant number of missed tumors were < 2 cm (45/107, 42%), isoattenuating on CT (32/72, 44%) or non-contour deforming (44/107, 41%). Most (29/49, 59%) misinterpreted examinations were reported as uncomplicated pancreatitis. Almost all examinations (94/107, 88%) demonstrated secondary signs; pancreatic duct dilation was the most common (65/107, 61%) and vascular invasion was the most commonly missed 35/39 (90%). Of the CT and MRIs, 28 of 88 (32%) had suboptimal contrast dosing. Inattentional blindness was the most common cognitive bias, identified in 55/107 (51%) of the exams.

CONCLUSION

Recognizing pitfalls of PDAC detection and interpretation, including intrinsic tumor features, secondary signs, technical factors, and cognitive biases, can assist radiologists in making an early and accurate diagnosis.

KEY POINTS

• There were 66/107 (62%) and 49/107 (46%) cases with missed and misinterpreted imaging findings, respectively, with tumoral, technical, and cognitive factors leading to the misdiagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. • The majority (29/49, 59%) of misinterpreted cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were mistaken for pancreatitis, where an underlying mass or secondary signs were not appreciated due to inflammatory changes. • The most common missed secondary sign of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was vascular encasement, missed in 35/39 (90%) of cases, indicating the importance of evaluating the peri-pancreatic vasculature.

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.

Advanced MR Imaging of the Pancreas

MR imaging can be optimized to evaluate a spectrum of pancreatic disorders with advanced sequences aimed to provide quantitative results and increase MR diagnostic capabilities. The pancreas remains a challenging organ to image because of its small size and location deep within the body. Besides its anatomic limitations, pancreatic pathology can be difficult to identify in the early stages. For example, subtle changes in ductal anatomy and parenchymal composition seen in early chronic pancreatitis are imperceptible with other modalities, such as computed tomography. This article reviews the application of MR imaging techniques and emerging MR sequences used in pancreas imaging.

Diagnostic accuracy of unenhanced CT texture analysis to differentiate mass-forming pancreatitis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

To investigate the value of texture analysis on unenhanced computed tomography (CT) to potentially differentiate mass-forming pancreatitis (MFP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

A retrospective study consisting of 109 patients (30 MFP patients vs 79 PDAC patients) who underwent preoperative unenhanced CT between January 2012 and December 2017 was performed. Synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) algorithm was adopted to reconstruct and balance MFP and PDAC samples. A total of 396 radiomic features were extracted from unenhanced CT images. Mann-Whitney U test and minimum redundancy maximum relevance (MRMR) methods were used for the purpose of dimension reduction. Predictive models were constructed using random forest (RF) method, and were validated using leave group out cross-validation (LGOCV) method. Diagnostic performance of the predictive model, including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predicting value (PPV), and negative predicting value (NPV), was recorded.

RESULTS

We applied 200% of SMOTE to MFP and PDAC patients, resulting in 90 MFP patients compared with 120 PDAC patients. Dimension reduction steps yielded 30 radiomic features using Mann-Whitney U test and MRMR methods. Ten radiomic features were retained using RF method. Four most predictive parameters, including GreyLevelNonuniformity_angle90_offset1, VoxelValueSum, HaraVariance, and ClusterProminence_AllDirection_offset1_SD, were used to generate the predictive model with preferable 92.2% sensitivity, 94.2% specificity, 93.3% accuracy, 92.2% PPV, and 94.2% NPV. Finally, in LGOCV analysis, a high pooled mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (82.6%, 80.8%, and 82.1%, respectively) indicate a relatively reliable and stable predictive model.

CONCLUSIONS

Unenhanced CT texture analysis can be a promising noninvasive method in discriminating MFP from PDAC.

Pictorial Review of Rare Pancreatic Tumors and Tumor-Like Lesions

췌장에는 다양한 종류의 종양 및 종양 유사 병변들이 생길 수 있다. 이 가운데, 췌장선암은 췌장의 가장 흔한 종양으로서 일반적으로 췌장암이라고 하면 이 종양을 가리킨다. 최근에는 영상 검사의 기술적 진보와 이용이 증가하면서 췌장의 희귀 종양 및 종양 유사 병변들의 발견 빈도가 증가하고 있다. 췌장의 드문 종양 및 종양과 유사한 병변들은 치료 방침과 예후가 췌장선암과 다르기 때문에 이들 질환의 감별은 임상적으로 중요한 의의가 있다. 영상 검사는 포상세포암이나 신경초종 등의 희귀 종양 및 자가면역 췌장염 또는 염증성 거짓종양과 같은 종양 유사 병변들과 췌장선암의 감별 진단에 중요한 역할을 하지만 영상 소견만으로 이들 질환을 정확히 구분하는 것은 한계가 있다. 이 논문에서는 췌장에서 생길 수 있는 희귀 종양 및 종양 유사 병변들의 다양한 영상 소견들과 췌장선암과의 감별에 있어 도움이 되는 특징들을 제시하고자 한다.