Journals / Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology / 2020 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 9

Evaluation of pancreatic steatosis prevalence and anthropometric measurements using non-contrast computed tomography

Pages
640–648
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The determination of the cut-off values for various criteria on non-contrast CT can provide more objective evaluations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aims: Pancreatic steatosis (PS) is a subject of current interest and its prevalence has been reported to range from 16.1% to 30.7% using various radiological methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to evaluate PS prevalence with non-contrast computed tomography (CT).Materials and methods: The non-contrast CT scans taken in 2016 and 2017 in our hospital were retrospectively screened.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The determination of the cut-off values for various criteria on non-contrast CT can provide more objective evaluations.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Background/aims: Pancreatic steatosis (PS) is a subject of current interest and its prevalence has been reported to range from 16.1% to 30.7% using various radiological methods. This study aimed to evaluate PS prevalence with non-contrast computed tomography (CT).Materials and methods: The non-contrast CT scans taken in 2016 and 2017 in our hospital were retrospectively screened. A total of 637 cases (320 males, 317 females) were included in the study. CT number measurements were performed from three anatomic regions of the pancreas using regions of interest (ROI) of approximately 1 cm2. The cases with a <0.7 ratio of the pancreatic over splenic CT number were accepted as quantitatively steatosis-positive. Anthropometric evaluations were undertaken by determining various parameters defined on CT.Results: PS was determined visually in 30.6% of the males and 29% of the females, and quantitatively in 32.8% and 30.6%, respectively. A positive agreement was determined between the quantitative and visual evaluations of steatosis (Cohen's kappa coefficient=0.587, p<0.001). Although PS was seen to be mostly diffuse, the tail region of the pancreas was determined to be the area with most steatosis.Conclusion: PS is usually overlooked in radiology practice but it has a clinical presentation with non-insignificant prevalence. Current radiological methods are adequate in the evaluation of PS. The determination of the cut-off values for various criteria on non-contrast CT can provide more objective evaluations.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOÇ, U., TAYDAS, O. (2020). Evaluation of pancreatic steatosis prevalence and anthropometric measurements using non-contrast computed tomography. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 9, 640–648. https://ajindex.com/articles/408735

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Ogilvie RF. The islands of Langerhans in 19 cases of obesity. The Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology 1933
  2. [Crossref] 2. Olsen TS. Lipomatosis of the pancreas in autopsy material and its relation to age and overweight. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand A 1978
  3. 86a: 367-73. [Crossref] 3. Stamm BH. Incidence and diagnostic significance of minor pathologic changes in the adult pancreas at autopsy: a systematic study of 112 autopsies in patients without known pancreatic disease. Hum Pathol 1984
  4. [Crossref] 4. Smits MM, van Geenen EJ. The clinical significance of pancreatic steatosis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011
  5. [Crossref] 5. Alempijevic T, Dragasevic S, Zec S, Popovic D, Milosavljevic T. Non-alcoholic fatty pancreas disease. Postgrad Med J 2017
  6. [Crossref] 6. Hori M, Takahashi M, Hiraoka N, et al. Association of pancreatic Fatty infiltration with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2014
  7. e53. [Crossref] 7. Mathur A, Pitt HA, Marine M, et al. Fatty pancreas: a factor in postoperative pancreatic fistula. Ann Surg 2007
  8. [Crossref] 8. Idilman IS, Aniktar H, Idilman R, et al. Hepatic steatosis: quantification by proton density fat fraction with MR imaging versus liver biopsy. Radiology 2013
  9. [Crossref] 9. Pickhardt PJ, Graffy PM, Reeder SB, Hernando D, Li K. Quantification of Liver Fat Content With Unenhanced MDCT: Phantom and Clinical Correlation With MRI Proton Density Fat Fraction. Am J Roentgenol 2018
  10. [Crossref] 10. Graffy PM, Sandfort V, Summers RM, Pickhardt PJ. Automated Liver Fat Quantification at Nonenhanced Abdominal CT for Population-based Steatosis Assessment. Radiology 2019
  11. [Crossref] 11. Chouhan MD, Firmin L, Read S, Amin Z, Taylor SA. Quantitative pancreatic MRI: a pathology-based review. Br J Radiol 2019
  12. 20180941. [Crossref] 12. Koc U, Taydas O. Investigation of the relationship between fatty pancreas and cholecystectomy using noncontrast computed tomography. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2019
  13. [Crossref] 13. Koc U, Ocakoglu G, Algın O. The Efficacy of the 3-dimensional VIBE-CAIPIRINHA-Dixon technique in the Evaluation of Pancreatic Steatosis. Turk J Med Sci 2020
  14. Tahtaci M, Algin O, Karakan T, et al. Can pancreatic steatosis affect exocrine functions of pancreas? Turk J Gastroenterol 2018
  15. [Crossref] 15. Miyake H, Sakagami J, Yasuda H, et al. Association of fatty pancreas with