Abstract
Inconclusive findings on abdominal computerized tomography (CT) scans such as “enlarged or prominent pancreas” are commonly reported; however, their clinical significance is not clearly understood. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in a cohort of patients with indeterminate findings on CT. We undertook a retrospective, single-center study at a tertiary care university hospital. About 107 consecutive patients (56 men) underwent EUS evaluation for inconclusive CT findings. The main intervention was EUS with fine needle aspiration (FNA) The main outcome measurement was to describe lesions identified by EUS in this cohort of patients. About 22 patients (21%) had pancreatic adenocarcinoma, 14 (13%) had chronic pancreatitis, 28 (26%) had benign lesions, and 35 patients (33%) had a normal EUS exam. Pancreatic cancer was more likely to be found on EUS in patients with significant weight loss (OR 10.1; 95% CI: 3.3–30.60), hyperbilirubinemia (OR 9; 95% CI: 3–26.0), or common bile duct (CBD) dilatation (OR 3.2; 95% CI: 1.25–8.5). The limitations of the study were that we were unable to control the uniformity of CT interpretation because the scans were reviewed by multiple radiologists. There were also limited follow-up data on patients who had benign lesions or normal EUS. In conclusion, EUS is an effective modality for evaluating pancreatic lesions in patients with inconclusive findings on abdominal CT. This assists in the prompt diagnosis and institution of appropriate treatment strategies for a variety of pancreatic diseases including cancer. In the setting of inconclusive CT findings, patients with hyperbilirubinemia, significant weight loss, or CBD dilatation should undergo EUS evaluation as they are at a higher risk of having underlying pancreatic cancer.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ (2007) Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin 57(1):43–66
Kłek S, Kulig J, PopielaT, Kołodziejczyk P, Szybiński P, Richter P (2004) The value of modern ultrasonographic techniques and computed tomography in detecting and staging of pancreatic carcinoma. Acta Chir Belg 104(6):659–667
Bluemke DA, Cameron JL, Hruban RH, Pitt HA, Siegelman SS, Soyer P, Fishman EK (1995) Potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: spiral CT assessment with surgical and pathologic correlation. Radiology 197(2):381–385
Campbell JP, Wilson SR (1988) Pancreatic neoplasms: how useful is evaluation with US? Radiology 167(2):341–344
Lynch HT, Smyrk T, Kem SE, Hruben RH, Lightdale CJ, Lemon SJ, Lynch JF, Fusaro LR (1996) Familial pancreatic cancer: a review. Semin Oncol 23(2):251–275
Freeny PC, Traverso LW, Ryan JA (1993) Diagnosis and staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma with dynamic computed tomography. Am J Surg 165(5):600–606
DeWitt J, Jowell P, Leblanc J, McHenry L, McGreevy K, Kramer H, Volmar K, Sherman S, Gress F (2005) EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic metastases: a multicenter experience. Gastrointest Endosc 61(6):689–696
Soriano A, Castells A, Ayuso M, Ayuso J, de Caralt M, Ginès M, Real M, Gilabert R, Quintó L, Trilla A, Feu F, Montanyá X, Fernández-Cruz L, Navarro R (2004) Preoperative staging and tumor resectability assessment of pancreatic cancer: prospective study comparing endoscopic ultrasonography, helical computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography. Am J Gastroenterol 99(3):492–501
Protiva P, Sahai AV, Agarwal B (2001) Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic neoplasms. Int J Gastrointest Cancer 30(1–2):33–45
Catanzaro A, Richardson S, Veloso H, Isenberg GA, Wong RC, Sivak MV Jr, Chak A (2003) Long-term follow-up of patients with clinically indeterminate suspicion of pancreatic cancer and normal EUS. Gastrointest Endosc 58(6):836–840
Ho S, Bonasera RJ, Pollack BJ, Grendell J, Feuerman M, Gress F (2006) A single-center experience of endoscopic ultrasonography for enlarged pancreas on computed tomography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 4(1):98–103
Ryozawa S, Kitoh H, Gondo T, Urayama N, Yamashita H, Ozawa H, Yanai H, Okita K (2005) Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol 40(9):907–911
Agarwal B, Abu Hamda E, Molke KL, Correa AM, Ho L (2004) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and multidetector spiral CT in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 99(5):844–850
Kulig J, Popiela T, Kołodziejczyk P, Szybínski P, Popiela TJ, Urbank A (2005) The value of imaging techniques in the staging of pancreatic cancer. Surg Endosc 19(3):361–365
Guerrini I, Gentili C, Guazzelli M (2006) Alcohol consumption and heavy drinking: a survey in three Italian villages. Alcohol Alcohol 41(3):336–340
Rösch T (1995) Staging of pancreatic cancer. Analysis of literature results. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 5(4):735–739
Klapman JB, Chang KJ, Lee JG, Nguyen P (2005) Negative predictive value of endoscopic ultrasound in a large series of patients with a clinical suspicion of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 100(12):2658–2661
Rösch T, Lorenz R, Braig C, Feuerbach S, Siewert JR, Schusdziarra V, Classen M (1991) Endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic tumor diagnosis. Gastrointest Endosc 37(3):347–352
Delbeke D, Pinson CW (2004) Pancreatic tumors: role of imaging in the diagnosis, staging, and treatment. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 11(1):4–10
Michl P, Pauls S, Gress TM (2006) Evidence-based diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 20(2):227–251
Mertz HR, Sechopoulos P, Delbeke D, Leach SD (2000) EUS, PET, and CT scanning for evaluation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 52(3):367–371
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Singh, S., Reddymasu, S., Waheed, S. et al. Endoscopic Ultrasonography Findings in Patients with Non-Specific Changes of the Pancreas on Computed Tomography: A Single-Center Experience. Dig Dis Sci 53, 2799–2804 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-008-0204-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-008-0204-3