Fukuoka and AGA Criteria Have Superior Diagnostic Accuracy for Advanced Cystic Neoplasms than Sendai Criteria

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the American Gastroenterological Association guidelines (AGA criteria), the 2012 (Fukuoka criteria), and 2006 (Sendai criteria) International Consensus Guidelines for the diagnosis of advanced pancreatic cystic neoplasms.

Methods

All patients who underwent surgical resection of a pancreatic cyst from August 2007 through January 2016 were retrospectively analyzed at a single tertiary academic center. Relevant clinical and imaging variables along with pathology results were collected to determine appropriate classification for each guideline. Advanced pancreatic cystic neoplasms were defined by the presence of either high-grade dysplasia or cystic adenocarcinoma. Diagnostic accuracy was measured by ROC analysis.

Results

A total of 209 patients were included. Both the AGA and Fukuoka criteria had a higher diagnostic accuracy for advanced neoplastic cysts than the Sendai criteria: AGA ROC 0.76 (95% CI 0.69–0.81), Fukuoka ROC 0.78 (95% CI 0.74–0.82), and Sendai ROC 0.65 (95% CI 0.61–0.69) (p < 0.0001). There was no difference between the Fukuoka and the AGA criteria. While the sensitivity was higher in the Fukuoka criteria compared to the AGA criteria (97.7 vs. 88.6%), the specificity was higher in the AGA criteria compared to the Fukuoka criteria (62.4 vs. 58.2%).

Conclusions

In a surgical series of patients with pancreatic cysts, the AGA and Fukuoka criteria had superior diagnostic accuracy for advanced neoplastic cysts compared to the original Sendai criteria.

     

The utility of intracystic glucose levels in differentiating mucinous from non-mucinous pancreatic cysts

BackgroundDifferentiating benign non-mucinous from potentially malignant mucinous pancreatic cysts is still a challenge. This study aims to improve this distinction with cyst fluid analysis.MethodsA cohort study of pancreatic cyst undergoing EUS/FNA was performed from a prospectively maintained database between 2014 and 2018 was performed.Results113 patients were analyzed (40 non-mucinous and 73 mucinous). For differentiating mucinous from non-mucinous cyst: intracyst glucose ≤41 mg/dl had a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 92%; positive predictive value (PPV) of 96 and negative predictive value (NPV) of 86. Glucose ≤21 mg/dl had a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 97%, PPV of 98 and NPV of 81. CEA ≥192 ng/mL had a sensitivity of 50% and a specificity of 92%; PPV of 92 and NPV of 50. Glucose ≤21 mg/dl or CEA ≥192 ng/mL combined had a sensitivity of 93%, specificity of 92%, PPV of 96 and NPV of 87 (Fig. 1, Table 1).ConclusionIntra-cyst glucose levels (≤41 mg/dl) outperforms classic CEA testing for differentiation of mucinous from non-mucinous pancreatic cysts. It was found to be an excellent diagnostic test with an AUC of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.97).     

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in diagnosis of cystic pancreatic lesions

Background and study aimspancreatic cysts are commonly found lesions and proper diagnosis is very important for planning further management. The study aims to evaluate the role of cyst fluid amylase and tumour markers as cancer antigen (CA 19-9) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in addition to mucin stain in diagnosing pancreatic cysts and differentiating malignant from benign lesions.Patients and methodsThis prospective study was conducted on 184 patients diagnosed to have pancreatic cystic lesions from January 2013 to January 2018. Fluid analysis for CA 19-9, CEA, amylase, mucin stain and cytopathology were done. We compared these data with the final diagnosis based on histopathology after surgical resection, positive cytopathology and long period of follow up of the patients for at least 18 months.ResultsThe highest AUC was that of cystic CEA with cut-off value of 160 ng/ml; it had a sensitivity of 60.4% and a specificity of 85%. The best cut-off value for cystic CA 19-9 was 1318 U/ml with a sensitivity of 64.1% and a specificity of 68.1%. The cut-off value of cyst amylase level was 5500 U/L, with 84.2% sensitivity and 37.1% specificity. The sensitivity of mucin stain in detecting mucinous cystic neoplasm was 85.45%, specificity was 86.05% with accuracy 85.87%.ConclusionCyst fluid analysis by investigating amylase, mucin, CA 19-9, CEA and EUS examination improves the diagnosis of different pancreatic cysts.     

Combination of cyst fluid CEA and CA 125 is an accurate diagnostic tool for differentiating mucinous cystic neoplasms from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms

Background/objectivesDespite advances in imaging techniques, diagnosis and management of pancreatic cystic lesions still remains challenging. The objective of this study was to determine the utility of cyst fluid analysis (CEA, CA 19-9, CA 125, amylase, and cytology) in categorizing pancreatic cystic lesions, and in differentiating malignant from benign cystic lesions.MethodsA retrospective analysis of 68 patients with histologically and clinically confirmed cystic lesions was performed. Cyst fluid was obtained by surgical resection (n = 45) or endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) (n = 23). Cyst fluid tumor markers and amylase were measured and compared between the cyst types.ResultsReceiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of the tumor markers demonstrated that cyst fluid CEA provided the greatest area under ROC curve (AUC) (0.884) for differentiating mucinous versus non-mucinous cystic lesions. When a CEA cutoff value was set at 67.3 ng/ml, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing mucinous cysts were 89.2%, 77.8%, and 84.4%, respectively. The combination of cyst fluid CEA content >67.3 ng/ml and cyst fluid CA 125 content >10.0 U/ml segregated 77.8% (14/18) of mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) from other cyst subtypes. On the other hand, no fluid marker was useful for differentiating malignant versus benign cystic lesions. Although cytology (accuracy 83.3%) more accurately diagnosed malignant cysts than CEA (accuracy 65.6%), it lacked sensitivity (35.3%).ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that cyst fluid CEA can be a helpful marker in differentiating mucinous from non-mucinous, but not malignant from benign cystic lesions. A combined CEA and CA 125 approach may help segregate MCNs from IPMNs.     

Molecular analysis of pancreatic cystic neoplasm in routine clinical practice

BACKGROUNDCystic pancreatic lesions consist of a wide variety of lesions that are becoming increasingly diagnosed with the growing use of imaging techniques. Of these, mucinous cysts are especially relevant due to their risk of malignancy. However, morphological findings are often suboptimal for their differentiation. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with molecular analysis has been suggested to improve the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts.AIMTo determine the impact of molecular analysis on the detection of mucinous cysts and malignancy.METHODSAn 18-month prospective observational study of consecutive patients with pancreatic cystic lesions and an indication for EUS-FNA following European clinical practice guidelines was conducted. These cysts included those > 15 mm with unclear diagnosis, and a change in follow-up or with concerning features in which results might change clinical management. EUS-FNA with cytological, biochemical and glucose and molecular analyses with next-generation sequencing were performed in 36 pancreatic cysts. The cysts were classified as mucinous and non-mucinous by the combination of morphological, cytological and biochemical analyses when surgery was not performed. Malignancy was defined as cytology positive for malignancy, high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma on surgical specimen, clinical or morphological progression, metastasis or death related to neoplastic complications during the 6-mo follow-up period. Next-generation sequencing results were compared for cyst type and malignancy.RESULTSOf the 36 lesions included, 28 (82.4%) were classified as mucinous and 6 (17.6%) as non-mucinous. Furthermore, 5 (13.9%) lesions were classified as malignant. The amount of deoxyribonucleic acid obtained was sufficient for molecular analysis in 25 (69.4%) pancreatic cysts. The amount of intracystic deoxyribonucleic acid was not statistically related to the cyst fluid volume obtained from the lesions. Analysis of KRAS and/or GNAS showed 83.33% [95% confidence interval (CI): 63.34-100] sensitivity, 60% (95%CI: 7.06-100) specificity, 88.24% (95%CI: 69.98-100) positive predictive value and 50% (95%CI: 1.66-98.34) negative predictive value (P = 0.086) for the diagnosis of mucinous cystic lesions. Mutations in KRAS and GNAS were found in 2/5 (40%) of the lesions classified as non-mucinous, thus recategorizing those lesions as mucinous neoplasms, which would have led to a modification of the follow-up plan in 8% of the cysts in which molecular analysis was successfully performed. All 4 (100%) malignant cysts in which molecular analysis could be performed had mutations in KRAS and/or GNAS, although they were not related to malignancy (P > 0.05). None of the other mutations analyzed could detect mucinous or malignant cysts with statistical significance (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONMolecular analysis can improve the classification of pancreatic cysts as mucinous or non-mucinous. Mutations were not able to detect malignant lesions.     

内镜超声引导下细针穿刺细胞学及囊液癌胚抗原分析诊断胰腺囊性病变的价值

目的探讨内镜超声引导下细针穿刺（EUS-FNA）细胞学检查、囊液癌胚抗原（cEA）分析对区分胰腺囊性病变良恶性的诊断价值。方法对27例胰腺囊性病变患者行EUS-FNA细胞学检查和囊液CEA分析,绘制囊液CEA受试者工作特征曲线并通过Youden指数确定诊断临界值,以手术病理诊断为金标准,统计分析EUS、EUS-FNA细胞学及囊液CEA分析鉴别诊断胰腺囊性病变良恶性的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和准确率。结果手术病理确诊良性病变14例、潜在恶性／恶性病变13例。EUS鉴别诊断胰腺囊性病变良恶性的准确率、敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为77．8％（21／27）、69．2％（9／13）、85．7％（12／14）、81．8％（9／11）、75．0％（12／16）;EUS-FNA细胞学上述指标分别为85．2％（23／27）、76．9％（10／13）、92．9％（13／14）、90．9％（10／11）、81．3％（13／16）;以囊液CEA值22．24ng／ml为诊断临界值,上述指标分别为74．1％（20／27）、84．6％（11／13）、64．3％（9／14）、68．8％（11／16）、81．8％（9／11）。结论EUS-FNA细胞学鉴别诊断胰腺囊性病变良恶性具有较高的准确率和特异度,而囊液CEA分析（诊断临界值22．24ng／m1）鉴别诊断胰腺囊性病变良恶性的敏感度较高,选择合适的胰腺囊液CEA分析诊断临界值结合EUS-FNA细胞学检查可以基本满足临床鉴别胰腺囊性病变良恶性的需要。     

Endosonography in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts

Rapid advances in radiologic technology and increased cross-sectional imaging have led to a sharp rise in incidental discoveries of pancreatic cystic lesions. These cystic lesions include non-neoplastic cysts with no risk of malignancy, neoplastic non-mucinous serous cystadenomas with little or no risk of malignancy, as well as neoplastic mucinous cysts and solid pseudopapillary neoplasms both with varying riskof malignancy. Accurate diagnosis is imperative as management is guided by symptoms and risk of malignancy. Endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) allows high resolution evaluation of cyst morphology and precise guidance for fine needle aspiration(FNA) of cyst fluid for cytological, chemical and molecular analysis. Initially, clinical evaluation and radiologic imaging, preferably with magnetic resonance imaging of the pancreas and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, are performed. In asymptomatic patients where diagnosis is unclear and malignant risk is indeterminate, EUSFNA should be used to confirm the presence or absence of high-risk features, differentiate mucinous from non-mucinous lesions, and diagnose malignancy. After analyzing the cyst fluid for viscosity, cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen, amylase, and cyst wall cytology should be obtained. DNA analysis may add useful information in diagnosing mucinous cysts when the previous studies are indeterminate. New molecular biomarkers are being investigated to improve diagnostic capabilities and management decisions in these challenging cystic lesions. Current guidelines recommend surgical pancreatic resection as the standard of care for symptomatic cysts and those with high-risk features associated with malignancy. EUSguided cyst ablation is a promising minimally invasive, relatively low-risk alternative to both surgery and surveillance.     

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

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-MD-IPMNs, 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 intermediate-grade 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 LR- and 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-MD-IPMNs, 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.     

Nature and management of pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN): A systematic review of the literature

BackgroundThe current management of pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN) is defined by the consensus European, International Association of Pancreatology and American College of Gastroenterology guidelines. However, the criterion for surgical resection remains uncertain and differs between these guidelines. Therefore through this systematic review of the existing literature we aimed to better define the natural history and prognosis of these lesions, in order to clarify recommendations for future management.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) for studies published in the English language between 1970 and 2015.ResultsMCNs occur almost exclusively in women (female:male 20:1) and are mainly located in the pancreatic body or tail (93–95%). They are usually found incidentally at the age of 40–60 years. Cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic ultrasound are the most frequently used diagnostic tools, but often it is impossible to differentiate MCNs from branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMN) or oligocystic serous adenomas pre-operatively. In resected MCNs, 0–34% are malignant, but in those less than 4 cm only 0.03% were associated with invasive adenocarcinoma. No surgically resected benign MCNs were associated with a synchronous lesion or recurrence; therefore further follow-up is not required after resection. Five-year survival after surgical resection of a malignant MCN is approximately 60%.ConclusionsCompared to other pancreatic tumors, MCNs have a low aggressive behavior, with exceptionally low rates of malignant transformation when less than 4 cm in size, are asymptomatic and lack worrisome features on pre-operative imaging. This differs significantly from the natural history of small BD-IPMNs, supporting the need to differentiate mucinous cyst subtypes pre-operatively, where possible. The findings support the recommendations from the recent European Consensus Guidelines, for the more conservative management of MCNs.     

Appraisal of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts

Nearly 2.5% of cross-sectional imaging studies will report a finding of a cystic pancreatic lesion. Eventhough most of these are incidental findings, it remains very concerning for both patients and treating clinicians. Differentiating and predicting malignant transformation in pancreatic cystic lesions is clinically challenging. Current evaluation of suspicious cystic lesions includes a combination of radiologic imaging, endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) and cyst fluid analyses. Despite these attempts, precise diagnostic stratification among nonmucinous, mucinous, and malignant cystic lesions is often not possible until surgical resection. EUS-guided needle based confocal laser endomicroscopy(n CLE) for evaluation of pancreatic cysts is emerging as a powerful technique with remarkable potential. Though limited imaging data from 3 large clinical trials(INSPECT, DETECT and CONTACT) are currently the reference standard for n CLE imaging, nonetheless these have not been validated in large studies. The aim of this review article is to review the evolving role of EUS-guided n CLE in management of pancreatic cystic lesions in terms of its significance, adverse events, limitations, and implications.     

Increased incidence of indeterminate pancreatic cysts and changes of management pattern: Evidence from nationwide data

Background: Pancreatic cysts are common. However, most studies are based on data collected from individual centers. The present study aimed to evaluate the changes of management patterns for pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs) by analyzing large epidemiologic data. Methods: Between January 2007 and December 2018, information regarding pancreatic cystic lesions was acquired from the nationwide Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database in Korea. Results: The final number of patients with...     

Utility of endoscopic ultrasound, cytology and fluid carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 19-9 levels in pancreatic cystic lesions

AIM： To assess the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound （EUS）, fluid tumor markers and cytology in distinguishing benign from （pre）malignant pancreatic cystic lesions.
METHODS： 46 consecutive patients, referred to a gastroenterologist and surgeon for a symptomatic or incidental pancreatic cyst, were reviewed. EUS, cytology, and carcinoembryonic antigen （CEA） and carbohydrate antigen （CA 19-9） levels were compared with the final diagnosis, based on surgical pathology and/or imaging follow-up of at least 12 mo. Cysts were classified as benign （pseudocyst, serous cystadenoma） or malignant/ pre-malignant （mucinous cystic neoplasm）. Receiver- operator characteristics （ROC） curve analysis was performed. RESULTS： The mean age was 56 years; 29% were male and median cyst diameter was 3 cm. Final outcome was obtained in 41 （89%） patients. Twenty-three （56%） of these 41 had surgical pathology. Twenty-three （56%） had benign lesions and 18 （44%） had malignant/premalignant lesions. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive value of EUS alone to distinguish benign from malignant/premalignant pancreatic cystic lesions were 50%, 56%, 36% and 54% and for cytology were 71%, 96%, 92% and 85%, respectively. The corresponding values for the ROC-derived ideal cutoffs were 75%, 90%, 75%, 90% for CA 19-9 （〉 37 U/mL） and 70%, 85%, 79% and 78% for CEA （〉 3.1 ng/mL）. Subgroup analysis of those with surgical pathology yielded almost identical performance and cutoffs.
CONCLUSION： Cytology and cyst fluid tumor marker analysis is a very useful tool in distinguishing benign from （pre）malignant pancreatic cystic lesions.     

Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: When to Watch,When to Operate,and When to Ignore

Pancreatic cystic lesions are being increasingly identified with the widespread use of state-of-the-art imaging. These lesions are categorized into a broad range of neoplastic cysts and inflammatory pseudocysts. Identification of a pancreatic cyst requires the clinician to focus on the main clinical challenge of the benign or malignant nature of the cyst. Neoplastic cysts range the spectrum from benign, to premalignant, to frank malignancy. The management of these lesions is difficult, and the decision to resect or observe a lesion is hampered by limitations in current imaging and tissue sampling techniques that prevent the accurate characterization of all lesions. This article reviews current guidelines for the evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions, underscores the challenges posed by these lesions, and discusses current and future studies that will aid in patient management.     

Sensitivity of CT,MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the preoperative workup of histologically proven left-sided pancreatic lesions

Background and objectivesLeft-sided pancreatic lesions are often treated surgically. Accurate diagnostic work-up is therefore essential to prevent futile major abdominal surgery. Large series focusing specifically on the preoperative work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions are lacking. This surgical cohort analysis describes the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the diagnostic work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions.MethodsWe performed a post-hoc analysis of patients who underwent surgery for a left-sided pancreatic lesion between April 2010 and August 2017 and participated in the randomized CPR trial. Primary outcome was the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B. Sensitivity was determined as the most likely diagnosis of each modality compared with the postoperative histopathological diagnosis. Additionally, the change in sensitivity of EUS versus EUS-FNA/B (i.e., cyst fluid analysis, and/or tissue acquisition) was measured.ResultsOverall, 181 patients were included (benign: 23%, premalignant: 27%, malignant: 50%). Most patients had solid lesions (65%). Preoperative imaging included CT (86%), MRI (41%), EUS (68%). Overall, CT and EUS-FNA/B reached a sensitivity of both 71%, compared with 66% for MRI. When EUS was combined with FNA/B, sensitivity rose from 64% to 71%. For solid lesions, CT reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with MRI (70%) and EUS-FNA/B (69%). For cystic lesions, EUS-FNA/B reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with CT and MRI (both 62%).ConclusionsCT is the most sensitive diagnostic modality for solid and EUS-FNA/B for cystic left-sided pancreatic lesions. EUS-FNA/B was associated with an increased sensitivity when compared to EUS alone.     

Current status on the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts in the Asia-Pacific region: role of endoscopic ultrasound

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) play increasingly prominent roles in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts. The Asian Consortium of Endoscopic Ultrasound was recently formed to conduct collaborative research in this area. This is a review of literature on true pancreatic cysts. Due to the lack of systematic studies, there are no robust data on the true incidence of pancreatic cystic lesions in Asia and any change in over the recent decades. Certain EUS morphological features have been used to predict particular types of pancreatic cysts. Pancreatic cyst fluid viscosity, cytology, pancreatic enzymes, and tumor markers, in particular carcinoembryonic antigen, can aid in the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. Hemorrhage and infection are the most common complications of EUS-FNA of pancreatic cysts. Pancreatic cysts can either be observed or resected depending on the benign or malignant nature, or malignant potential of the lesions. Guidelines from an international consensus did not require positive cytological findings to be present in their recommendation for resection, which included all mucinous cystic neoplasms, all main-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN), all mixed IPMN, symptomatic side-branch IPMN, and side-branch IPMN larger than 3 cm. In patients with poor surgical risks, EUS-guided cyst ablation of mucinous pancreatic cysts is an alternative. As long-term prospective data on pancreatic cysts are still not available in Asia, management strategies are largely based on risk stratification by surgical risk and malignant potential. Gene expression profiling of pancreatic cyst fluid and confocal laser endomicroscopic examination of pancreatic cysts are novel techniques currently being studied.     

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the screening and follow-up of high-risk individuals for familial pancreatic cancer

Managing familial pancreatic cancer(FPC)is challenging for gastroenterologists,surgeons and oncologists.High-risk individuals(HRI)for pancreatic cancer(PC)(FPC or with germline mutations)are a heterogeneous group of subjects with a theoretical lifetime cumulative risk of PC over 5%.Screening is mainly based on annual magnetic resonance imaging(MRI)and endoscopic ultrasound(EUS).The goal of screening is to identify early-stage operable cancers or high-risk precancerous lesions(pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia or intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms with high-grade dysplasia).In the literature,target lesions are identified in 2%-5%of HRI who undergo screening.EUS appears to provide better identification of small solid lesions(0%-46%of HRI)and chronicpancreatitis-like parenchymal changes(14%-77%of HRI),while MRI is probably the best modality to identify small cystic lesions(13%-49%of HRI).There are no specific studies in HRI on the use of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS.EUS can also be used to obtain tissue samples.Nevertheless,there is still limited evidence on the accuracy of imaging procedures used for screening or agreement on which patients to treat.The cost-effectiveness of screening is also unclear.Certain new EUS-related techniques,such as searching for DNA abnormalities or protein markers in pancreatic fluid,appear to be promising.     

Clinical approach to incidental pancreatic cysts

The approach to incidentally noted pancreatic cysts is constantly evolving. While surgical resection is indicated for malignant or higher risk cysts, correctly identifying these highest risk pancreatic cystic lesions remains difficult. Using parameters including cyst size, presence of solid components, and pancreatic duct involvement, the 2012 International Association of Pancreatology(IAP) and the 2015 American Gastroenterological Association(AGA) guidelines have sought to identify the higher risk patients who would benefit from further evaluation using endoscopic ultrasound(EUS). Not only can EUS help further assess the presence of solid component and nodules, but also fine needle aspiration of cyst fluid aids in diagnosis by obtaining cellular, molecular, and genetic data. The impact of new endoscopic innovations with novel methods of direct visualization including confocal endomicroscopy require further validation. This review also highlights the differences between the 2012 IAP and 2015 AGA guidelines, which include the thresholds for sending patients for EUS and surgery and methods, interval, and duration of surveillance for unresected cysts.     

Management of mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas

The purpose of this study was to investigate the actual management of mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) of the pancreas. A systematic review was performed in December 2009 by consulting PubMed MEDLINE for publications and matching the "pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasm", "pancreatic mucinous cystic tumour", "pancreatic mucinous cystic mass", "pancreatic cyst", and "pancreatic cystic neoplasm" to identify English language articles describing the diagnosis and treatment of the mucinous cystic neoplasm of the pancreas. In total, 16 322 references ranging from January 1969 to December 2009 were analysed and 77 articles were identified. No articles published before 1996 were selected because MCNs were not previously considered to be a completely autonomous disease. Definition, epidemiology, anatomopathological findings, clinical presentation, preoperative evaluation, treatment and prognosis were reviewed. MCNs are pancreatic mucinproducing cysts with a distinctive ovarian-type stroma localized in the body-tail of the gland and occurring in middle-aged females. The majority of MCNs are slow growing and asymptomatic. The prevalence of invasive carcinoma varies between 6% and 55%. Preoperative diagnosis depends on a combination of clinical features, tumor markers, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasound with cyst fluid analysis, and positron emission tomography-CT. Surgery is indicated for all MCNs.     

Imaging of indeterminate pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review

BackgroundPancreatic cystic lesions are an increasing problem and investigation of these cysts can be fraught with difficulty. There is currently no gold standard for diagnosis or surveillance. This review was undertaken to determine the present reliability of the characterisation, assessment of malignant potential and diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions using available imaging modalities.MethodsA Medline search using the terms ‘pancreatic’, ‘pancreas’, ‘cyst’, ‘cystic’, ‘lesions’, ‘imaging’, ‘PET’. ‘CT’, ‘MRI’ and ‘EUS’ was performed. Publications were screened to include studies examining the performance of CT, MRI, MRCP, EUS and 18-FDG PET in the determination of benign or malignant cysts, cyst morphology and specific diagnoses.ResultsNineteen studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. 18-FDG PET had a sensitivity and specificity of 57.0–94.0% and 65.0–97.0% and an accuracy of 94% in determining benign versus malignant cysts. CT had a sensitivity and specificity of 36.3–71.4% and 63.9–100% in determining benign disease but had an accuracy of making a specific diagnosis of 39.0–44.7%. MRI had a sensitivity and specificity of 91.4–100.0% and 89.7% in assessing main pancreatic duct communication.ConclusionCT is a good quality initial investigation to be used in conjunction with clinical data. MRCP can add useful information regarding MPD communication but should be used judiciously. PET may have a role in equivocal cases to determine malignancy. Further examination of CT-PET in this patient group is warranted.