HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Sainani, N. I. Articles by Sahani, D. V. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sainani, N. I. Articles by Sahani, D. V. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Comparative Performance of MDCT and MRI With MR Cholangiopancreatography in Characterizing Small Pancreatic Cysts

¹ Division of Abdominal Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St., White 270, Boston, MA 02114-2696.
² Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
³ Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to compare MDCT with MRI–MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in characterizing small pancreatic cysts ( 3 cm) and predicting aggressiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. In a retrospective analysis, contrast-enhanced MDCT and MRI examinations of 30 patients with 38 pathologically confirmed small pancreatic cysts were reviewed. MDCT and MRCP studies were independently evaluated by two readers for cyst morphology, cyst characterization, and prediction of lesion aggressiveness, which included lesions with moderate-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia (carcinoma in situ), and invasive carcinomas. The sensitivity of MDCT and MRI for the detection of each morphologic feature, accuracy for cyst characterization, and predictive values for aggressiveness were calculated.

RESULTS. Of 38 lesions, 14 were side-branch intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), 12 mixed IPMNs, six mucinous cystic neoplasms, and six nonneoplastic cysts. On histopathology, 26 lesions were nonaggressive (six nonneoplastic cysts, six benign mucinous cystic neoplasms, 14 low-grade dysplasias in IPMNs), whereas 12 lesions revealed aggressive biology (eight moderate-grade dysplasias, four high-grade dysplasias in IPMNs). The sensitivity of MRCP for the detection of morphologic features was better than that of MDCT, but the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.25–1). Interreader agreement and MDCT–MRI agreement for morphologic features were good to perfect ( = 0.7–1). The accuracy of MDCT and MRI was higher in classifying cysts as mucinous or nonmucinous than in determining a specific diagnosis (71–84.2% vs 39.5–44.7%, respectively), whereas the accuracy of the two techniques in characterizing cysts into nonaggressive and aggressive categories was similar (MDCT vs MRI, 75–78% vs 78–86%, respectively; p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION. MRI enables more confident assessment of the morphology of small cysts than MDCT, but the accuracy of the two imaging techniques for cyst characterization is comparable. MDCT and MRI have high accuracy in classifying cysts into mucinous and nonmucinous categories and perform similarly in estimating histologic aggressiveness.

Keywords: MDCT • MR cholangiopancreatography • pancreatic cancer • pancreatic cysts

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?