» Articles » PMID: 18564119

Incidental Cystic Neoplasms of Pancreas: What is the Optimal Interval of Imaging Surveillance?

Overview
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2008 Jun 20
PMID 18564119
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The optimal interval of imaging studies for surveillance of incidental pancreatic cystic neoplasms is not known.

Objective: A retrospective analysis of longitudinal medical records of patients with pancreatic cystic neoplasms was performed to examine the natural history of incidentally detected cystic pancreatic neoplasms with respect to the development of significant growth and to identify predictors of such growth.

Results: After excluding patients with small (<10 mm) cysts (N = 144) and inadequate clinical follow-up of less than 6 months (N = 79) and those with a clinical diagnosis of pancreatic pseudocysts, serous cystadenoma, main duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (N = 29), and neuroendocrine tumor (N = 3), in total, 166 cysts in 150 patients were available for analysis. The working diagnoses on these cysts (based on clinical, radiological features, aspiration cytology, cyst fluid analysis, and surgical pathology data when available) were mucinous cystic neoplasm in 117 and branch-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm in 49. The mean standard error (SE) initial size of these cysts was 2 (0.1) cm. Over a median period of follow-up of 32 (IQR [inter-quartile range] 19-48) months, 89% of all the cysts did not show significant growth during the follow-up. In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, the initial size of the cystic lesion was an independent predictor of significant growth during follow-up (relative risk 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.61, P= 0.01); the only other significant variable was the presence of intracystic or mural nodule (relative risk 38.6, 95% CI 2.3-654, P= 0.01).

Conclusion: Most incidentally detected cystic neoplasms of the pancreas did not have significant growth during follow-up. Such growth is unlikely to occur before 2 yr of the baseline evaluation, and we suggest that the optimal imaging interval during follow-up of these patients should be at 2 yr from the baseline evaluation, particularly in cystic lesions 3.0 cm or less in size and without intracystic or mural nodules.

Citing Articles

Risk Assessment and Radiomics Analysis in Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Pancreatic Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms (IPMN).

Flammia F, Fusco R, Triggiani S, Pellegrino G, Reginelli A, Simonetti I Cancer Control. 2024; 31:10732748241263644.

PMID: 39293798 PMC: 11412216. DOI: 10.1177/10732748241263644.


Optimal Follow-up of Incidental Pancreatic Cystic Lesions without Worrisome Features: Clinical Outcome after Long-term Follow-up.

Ahn D, Lee S, Choi J, Cho I, Jang D, Paik W Gut Liver. 2023; 18(2):328-337.

PMID: 37840221 PMC: 10938161. DOI: 10.5009/gnl230017.


Clinical and radiological features that predict malignant transformation in cystic lesions of the pancreas: a retrospective case note review.

Keane M, Dadds H, El Sayed G, Luong T, Davidson B, Fusai G AMRC Open Res. 2020; 1:4.

PMID: 32322783 PMC: 7176489. DOI: 10.12688/amrcopenres.12860.2.


Follow-up of Incidentally Detected Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms: Do Baseline MRI and CT Features Predict Cyst Growth?.

Pandey P, Pandey A, Luo Y, Ghasabeh M, Khoshpouri P, Ameli S Radiology. 2019; 292(3):647-654.

PMID: 31310174 PMC: 6716563. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019181686.


[Cystic lesions of the pancreas : Differential diagnostics and treatment].

Rosendahl J, Michl P Internist (Berl). 2019; 60(3):219-225.

PMID: 30617702 DOI: 10.1007/s00108-018-0547-6.