Small and Potentially Resectable Focal Pancreatic Lesions Noted on CT/MRI Scans in Nonjaundiced Patients: Likelihood of Neoplasia and Utility of EUS

Overview

Journal J Gastrointest Surg

Specialty Gastroenterology

Date 2012 Jan 20

PMID 22258870

Citations 6

Authors

Naveen B Krishna

Pavan Tummala

Christopher D Mehan

Amith V Reddy

Jeremy A Hartman

Banke Agarwal

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Management of small and potentially resectable "mass" lesions encountered on CT/MRI scans in patients without obstructive jaundice (ObJ) is rather empirical since there is scant data on likelihood of neoplasm to formulate treatment strategies. We evaluated (1) the prevalence of neoplasm and (2) performance characteristics of EUS-FNA for diagnosing neoplasm in above-mentioned subset of patients.

Patients: This is a retrospective analysis of 232 patients (without ObJ) with a focal pancreatic lesion, ≤ 25 mm and potentially resectable on CT/MRI who underwent EUS-FNA from 2002 to 2009.

Results: Seventy-five patients (32.3%, 95% CI 26.6, 38.6) were finally diagnosed to have a neoplasm. Four of 92 (4.3%) lesions ≤ 15 mm, 13 of 57(22.8%) lesions 16-20 mm, and 35 of 83 (42.1%) lesions 21-25 mm had an adenocarcinoma. Larger lesion size, older patient age, and h/o recent weight loss significantly increased the likelihood of adenocarcinoma. EUS-FNA had 98.2% overall accuracy and 98.1% NPV with no significant differences based on lesion size.

Conclusions: In nonjaundiced patient with a potentially resectable pancreatic lesion ≤25 mm in size noted on CT/MRI scanning, EUS-FNA can provide useful adjunctive information to optimize the use of surgery and can potentially obviate the need for "wait and watch approach" with repeat imaging in their clinical management.

Citing Articles

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions: Does the size matter?.

Nakai Y, Hamada T, Hakuta R, Ishigaki K, Saito K, Saito T DEN Open. 2022; 2(1):e52.

PMID: 35310760 PMC: 8828213. DOI: 10.1002/deo2.52.

Modern ultrasound imaging of pancreatic tumors.

Dietrich C, Jenssen C Ultrasonography. 2020; 39(2):105-113.

PMID: 31962384 PMC: 7065990. DOI: 10.14366/usg.19039.

Elastography of the Pancreas, Current View.

Dietrich C, Hocke M Clin Endosc. 2019; 52(6):533-540.

PMID: 31311914 PMC: 6900297. DOI: 10.5946/ce.2018.156.

Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions.

Best L, Rawji V, Pereira S, Davidson B, Gurusamy K Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 4:CD010213.

PMID: 28415140 PMC: 6478242. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010213.pub2.

Novel Diagnostic and Predictive Biomarkers in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Chang J, Kundranda M Int J Mol Sci. 2017; 18(3).

PMID: 28335509 PMC: 5372679. DOI: 10.3390/ijms18030667.

References

Krishna N, Mehra M, Reddy A, Agarwal B . EUS/EUS-FNA for suspected pancreatic cancer: influence of chronic pancreatitis and clinical presentation with or without obstructive jaundice on performance characteristics. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70(1):70-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.030. View

Agarwal B, Correa A, Ho L . Survival in pancreatic carcinoma based on tumor size. Pancreas. 2008; 36(1):e15-20. DOI: 10.1097/mpa.0b013e31814de421. View

Micames C, Jowell P, White R, Paulson E, Nelson R, Morse M . Lower frequency of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with pancreatic cancer diagnosed by EUS-guided FNA vs. percutaneous FNA. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003; 58(5):690-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(03)02009-1. View

Lin F, Staerkel G . Cytologic criteria for well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the pancreas in fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens. Cancer. 2003; 99(1):44-50. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.11012. View

Krishna N, LaBundy J, Saripalli S, Safdar R, Agarwal B . Diagnostic value of EUS-FNA in patients suspected of having pancreatic cancer with a focal lesion on CT scan/MRI but without obstructive jaundice. Pancreas. 2009; 38(6):625-30. DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0b013e3181ac35d2. View

Bhutani M, Gress F, Giovannini M, Erickson R, Catalano M, Chak A . The No Endosonographic Detection of Tumor (NEST) Study: a case series of pancreatic cancers missed on endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopy. 2004; 36(5):385-9. DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-814320. View

Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Suetomi Y, Maekawa K, Takeyama Y, Kudo M . Utility of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography for diagnosis of small pancreatic carcinomas. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007; 34(4):525-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.09.018. View

Boland G, OMalley M, Saez M, Fernandez-Del-Castillo C, Warshaw A, Mueller P . Pancreatic-phase versus portal vein-phase helical CT of the pancreas: optimal temporal window for evaluation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 172(3):605-8. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.172.3.10063844. View

Gangi S, Fletcher J, Nathan M, Christensen J, Harmsen W, Crownhart B . Time interval between abnormalities seen on CT and the clinical diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: retrospective review of CT scans obtained before diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 182(4):897-903. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.182.4.1820897. View

10.

Agarwal B, Abu-Hamda E, Molke K, Correa A, Ho L . Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and multidetector spiral CT in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004; 99(5):844-50. DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.04177.x. View

11.

Pungpapong S, Wallace M, Woodward T, Noh K, Raimondo M . Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: a prospective comparison study. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2007; 41(1):88-93. DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31802dfde6. View

12.

Agarwal B, Ludwig O, Collins B, Cortese C . Immunostaining as an adjunct to cytology for diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008; 6(12):1425-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2008.08.010. View

13.

Siddiqui A, Brown L, Hong S, Draganova-Tacheva R, Korenblit J, Loren D . Relationship of pancreatic mass size and diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Dig Dis Sci. 2011; 56(11):3370-5. DOI: 10.1007/s10620-011-1782-z. View

14.

Savides T, Donohue M, Hunt G, Al-Haddad M, Aslanian H, Ben-Menachem T . EUS-guided FNA diagnostic yield of malignancy in solid pancreatic masses: a benchmark for quality performance measurement. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 66(2):277-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.01.017. View

15.

Bruzoni M, Johnston E, Sasson A . Pancreatic incidentalomas: clinical and pathologic spectrum. Am J Surg. 2008; 195(3):329-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.12.027. View

16.

Lahat G, Ben Haim M, Nachmany I, Sever R, Blachar A, Nakache R . Pancreatic incidentalomas: high rate of potentially malignant tumors. J Am Coll Surg. 2009; 209(3):313-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.05.009. View

17.

Sahai A, Zimmerman M, Aabakken L, Tarnasky P, Cunningham J, Van Velse A . Prospective assessment of the ability of endoscopic ultrasound to diagnose, exclude, or establish the severity of chronic pancreatitis found by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998; 48(1):18-25. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(98)70123-3. View

18.

Winter J, Cameron J, Lillemoe K, Campbell K, Chang D, Riall T . Periampullary and pancreatic incidentaloma: a single institution's experience with an increasingly common diagnosis. Ann Surg. 2006; 243(5):673-80. PMC: 1570557. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000216763.27673.97. View

19.

Catalano M, Sahai A, Levy M, Romagnuolo J, Wiersema M, Brugge W . EUS-based criteria for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: the Rosemont classification. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 69(7):1251-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.07.043. View

20.

Paquin S, Gariepy G, Lepanto L, Bourdages R, Raymond G, Sahai A . A first report of tumor seeding because of EUS-guided FNA of a pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 61(4):610-1. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(05)00082-9. View