Journals / Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology / 2021 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 9

Mucinous Pancreatic Cysts: Comparison of Cyst Size and Location in Certain Mucinous Cyst Subgroups

Pages
735–741
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 cyst size cut-off was 2.2 cm; however, <1.6 cm had a 100% NPV differentiating LR- from HR-non-MD-IPMNs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background: There are studies reporting that the location of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) predicts malignancy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 122 patients with a definite cyto-histological diagnosis of non-MDIPMNs, LR-MCNs, and cystic PDACs via endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration between October 2011 and October 2020.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The cyst size cut-off was 2.2 cm; however, <1.6 cm had a 100% NPV differentiating LR- from HR-non-MD-IPMNs.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Background: There are studies reporting that the location of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) predicts malignancy. Therefore, we evaluated the cyst location’s relationship with malignancy, and the possibility of using cyst size and location to distinguish between non-main duct (non-MD)-IPMNs, mucinous cystic neoplasia (MCN), and cystic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 122 patients with a definite cyto-histological diagnosis of non-MDIPMNs, LR-MCNs, and cystic PDACs via endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration between October 2011 and October 2020. We grouped the cyst locations as head, uncinate, neck (HUN), and corpus or tail (CT). On histology, low-grade dysplasia and intermediategrade dysplasia were considered low risk (LR), whereas high-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma were considered high risk (HR). Results: Of the 122 patients (61 (50%) women, median age 61.5 years (range 19-85), there were 34 (27.9%) LR-non-MD-IPMNs, 33 (27%) HR-non-MD-IPMNs, 19 (15.6%) LR-MCNs, and 36 (29.5%) cystic PDACs. We found no significant difference between LRand HR-non-MD-IPMN locations (P = .803). Low-risk non-MD-IPMNs were significantly smaller than HR-non-MD-IPMNs (P < .001), LR-MCNs (P = .002), and cystic PDACs (P < .001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.819 (95% CI: 0.716-0.902; P < .0001), and demonstrated a cyst size cut-off <2.2 cm to differentiate LR cysts, while cysts <1.6 cm had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% in non-MD-IPMNs. Conclusion: Cyst location is not predictive of malignancy in non-MD-IPMNs. Low-risk non-MD-IPMNs were smaller than HR-non-MDIPMNs, LR-MCNs, and cystic PDACs. The cyst size cut-off was 2.2 cm; however, <1.6 cm had a 100% NPV differentiating LR- from HR-non-MD-IPMNs.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÖKER, İ. H., ELAGÖZ, Ş., GÜCİN, Z., MALYA, F. Ü., ŞENTÜRK, H. (2021). Mucinous Pancreatic Cysts: Comparison of Cyst Size and Location in Certain Mucinous Cyst Subgroups. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 9, 735–741. https://ajindex.com/articles/409182

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. Al-Haddad M, El Hajj II, Eloubeidi MA. Endoscopic ultrasound for the evaluation of cystic lesions of the pancreas. JOP. 2010;11(4):299-309
  2. Basturk O, Coban I, Adsay NV. Pancreatic Cysts: Pathologic classification, differential diagnosis, and clinical implications. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(3):423-438. [CrossRef] 3. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Muthusamy VR, Chandrasekhara V, et al. The role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of inflammatory pancreatic fluid collections. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;83(3):481-488. [CrossRef] 4. Tanaka M, Fernández-del Castillo C, Adsay V, et al. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas. Pancreatology. 2012;12(3):183-197. [CrossRef] 5. Vege SS, Ziring B, Jain R, et al. American Gastroenterological Association institute guidelines on the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic neoplastic pancreatic cysts. Gastroenterology. 2015;148(4):819-22; quize12. [CrossRef] 6. Tanaka M, Fernández-Del Castillo C, Kamisawa T, et al. Revisions of international consensus Fukuoka guidelines for the management of IPMN of the pancreas. Pancreatology. 2017;17(5):738-753. [CrossRef] 7. Elta GH, Enestvedt BK, Sauer BG, Lennon AM. ACG clinical guideline: Diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113(4):464-479. [CrossRef] 8. Kaplan JH, Gonda TA. The use of biomarkers in the risk stratification of cystic neoplasms. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2018;28(4):549-568. [CrossRef] 9. Kerlakian S, Dhar VK, Abbott DE, et al. Cyst location and presence of high-grade dysplasia or invasive cancer in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas: A seven-institution study from the central pancreas consortium. HPB (Oxford). 2019;21(4):482- 488. [CrossRef] 10. Park J, Lee KT, Jang TH, et al. Risk factors associated with the postoperative recurrence of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas. Pancreas. 2011;40(1):46-51. [CrossRef] 11. Yogi T, Hijioka S, Imaoka H, et al. Risk factors for postoperative recurrence of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas based on a long-term follow-up study: Proposals for follow-up strategies. J Hepatobil Pancreat Sci. 2015;22(10):757-765. [CrossRef] 12. Shin SH, Han DJ, Park KT, et al. Validating a simple scoring system to predict malignancy and invasiveness of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas. World J Surg. 2010;34(4):776- 783. [CrossRef] 13. Suzuki Y, Naka