Journals / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2022 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3

MR quantitative 3D shape analysis helps to distinguish mucinous cystic neoplasm from serous oligocystic adenoma

Pages
193–199
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

CONCLUSION Shape_Sphericity in combination with age, sex, and location could help to distinguish MCN from SOA.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE We aimed to assess the performance of quantitative 3D shape analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic serous oligocystic adenoma (SOA) and mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN).
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS Four hundred thirty-two patients diagnosed with serous cystic neoplasms (SCNs) or MCNs were retrospectively reviewed from August 2014 to July 2019 and finally 87 patients with MCNs (n = 45) and SOAs (n = 42) were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION Shape_Sphericity in combination with age, sex, and location could help to distinguish MCN from SOA.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

PURPOSE We aimed to assess the performance of quantitative 3D shape analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic serous oligocystic adenoma (SOA) and mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN). METHODS Four hundred thirty-two patients diagnosed with serous cystic neoplasms (SCNs) or MCNs were retrospectively reviewed from August 2014 to July 2019 and finally 87 patients with MCNs (n = 45) and SOAs (n = 42) were included. Clinical data and magnetic resonance morphologic features with 3D shape analysis of lesions (shape sphericity, compacity, and volume) were recorded and compared between MCNs and SOAs according to the pathology. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify independent impact factors for differentiating MCN from SOA. RESULTS The age of MCN patients was younger than SOAs (43.02 ± 10.83 years vs. 52.78 ± 12.31 years; OR = 0.275; 95% CI: 0.098-0.768; P = .014). MCN has a higher female/male ratio than SOA (43/2 vs. 27/15; OR = 40.418; 95% CI: 2.704-604.171; P = .007) and was more often located in the distal of pancreas (OR = 31.403; 95% CI: 2.985-330.342; P = .004). Shape_Sphericity derived from 3D shape analysis was a significant independent factor in the multivariable analysis and the value of MCN was closer to 1 than SOA (OR = 35.153; 95% CI: 5.301-237.585; P < .001). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of Shape_Sphericity was 0.923 (optimal cutoff value was 0.964876). CONCLUSION Shape_Sphericity in combination with age, sex, and location could help to distinguish MCN from SOA.

🔖

Cite This Article

ZHU, S., WU, W., LOU, W., WANG, W., ZENG, M., RAO, S. (2022). MR quantitative 3D shape analysis helps to distinguish mucinous cystic neoplasm from serous oligocystic adenoma. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3, 193–199. https://ajindex.com/articles/487244

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. de Jong K, Nio CY, Hermans JJ, et al. High prevalence of pancreatic cysts detected by screening magnetic resonance imaging examinations. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010
  2. 8(9):806- 811. [CrossRef] 2. Lee KS, Sekhar A, Rofsky NM, Pedrosa I. Prevalence of incidental pancreatic cysts in the adult population on MR imaging. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010
  3. 105(9):2079-2084. [CrossRef] 3. Laffan TA, Horton KM, Klein AP, et al. Prevalence of unsuspected pancreatic cysts on MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008
  4. 191(3):802-807. [CrossRef] 4. Zhang XM, Mitchell DG, Dohke M, Holland GA, Parker L. Pancreatic cysts: depiction on singleshot fast spin-echo MR images. Radiology. 2002
  5. 223(2):547-553. [CrossRef] 5. Martínez B, Martínez JF, Aparicio JR. Prevalence of incidental pancreatic cyst on upper endoscopic ultrasound. Ann Gastroenterol. 2018
  6. 31(1):90-95. [CrossRef] 6. Moris M, Bridges MD, Pooley RA, et al. Association Between advances in high-resolution cross-section imaging technologies and increase in prevalence of pancreatic cysts from 2005 to 2014. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016
  7. 14(4):e583. [CrossRef] 7. Kromrey ML, Bülow R, Hübner J, et al. Prospective study on the incidence, prevalence and 5-year pancreatic-related mortality of pancreatic cysts in a population-based study. Gut. 2018
  8. 67(1):138-145. [CrossRef] 8. Zhu S, Wang WT, Shang XS, et al. Difference analysis in prevalence of incidental pancreatic cystic lesions between computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. BMC Med Imaging. 2019
  9. 19(1):43. [CrossRef] 9. Goh BK, Tan YM, Thng CH, et al. How useful are clinical, biochemical, and cross-sectional imaging features in predicting potentially malignant or malignant cystic lesions of the pancreas? Results from a single institution experience with 220 surgically treated patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2008
  10. 206(1):17-27. [CrossRef] 10. Curry CA, Eng J, Horton KM, et al. CT of primary cystic pancreatic neoplasms: can CT be used for patient triage and treatment? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000
  11. 175(1):99-103. [CrossRef] 11. Johnson CD, Stephens DH, Charboneau JW, Carpenter HA, Welch TJ. Cystic pancreatic tumors: CT and sonographic assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988
  12. 151(6):1133-1138. [CrossRef] 12. Lewandrowski K, Warshaw A, Compton C. Macrocystic serous cystadenoma of the pancreas: a morphologic variant differing from microcystic adenoma. Hum Pathol. 1992
  13. 23(8):871- 875. [CrossRef] 13. Warshaw AL, Compton CC, Lewandrowski K, Cardenosa G, Mueller PR. Cystic tumors of the pancreas