EUS and K-ras analysis of pure pancreatic juice collected via a duodenoscope after secretin stimulation for diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesion: a prospective study

BACKGROUND: The early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer remains problematic. This prospective study assessed the utility of a combination of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and genetic analysis of pure pancreatic juice in the diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions. METHODS: One hundred seventy-six patients with suspected pancreatic disease were enrolled and underwent ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), endoscopic retrograde choleangiopancreatography (ERCP), and EUS. Pure pancreatic juice was collected endoscopically after secretin stimulation. K-ras point mutations at codon 12 in the juice were assayed by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism. RESULTS: Thirty-six (20%) patients were found to have solid pancreatic masses including 19 with cancer (7 patients, 相似文献   

The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, computed tomography, and transabdominal ultrasound in the detection and staging of primary ampullary tumors

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To compare the accuracy between EUS (endoscopic ultrasound), ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography), CT (computed tomography), and transabdominal US (ultrasound) in the detection and staging of primary ampullary tumors. We will also try to discuss the influence of endobiliary stent on EUS in staging ampullary tumors. METHODOLOGY: Twenty-one patients with ampullary tumors were evaluated by EUS, ERCP, CT, and US before operation. The accuracy was assessed with TNM staging and compared with the surgical-pathological findings. RESULTS: EUS was superior to CT and US in detecting ampullary tumors, but EUS and ERCP are of similar sensitivity (EUS 95%, ERCP 95%, CT 19%, US 5%). EUS was superior to CT and US in T staging (EUS 75%, CT 5%, US 0%) and detecting lymph node metastasis (EUS 50%, CT 33%, US 0%) of ampullary tumors. The accuracy of EUS in T and N staging of ampullary tumors tended to be decreased in the presence of endobiliary stent (stenting: T 71%, N 75%; nonstenting T 83%, N 100%), but there was no statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: EUS was superior to CT and US in assessing primary ampullary tumors, but it was not significantly superior to ERCP in detecting ampullary tumors. The presence of endobiliary stent may decrease the accuracy of EUS in staging ampullary tumors.     

Modern imaging methods versus clinical assessment in the evaluation of hospital in-patients with suspected pancreatic disease

OBJECTIVE: Various modern imaging procedures such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), computed tomography (CT), and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) have been shown to be highly accurate in the diagnosis of specific disorders of the pancreas. However, prior information often causes bias in the interpretation of these results. Little information is available concerning the value of these examinations in the primary and differential diagnosis of suspected pancreatic disease-particularly in comparison with clinical evaluation, including laboratory tests and transabdominal ultrasound (TUS). METHODS: Clinical and imaging information (EUS, ERCP, and CT) was collected for 184 inpatients who were referred over a 5-yr period for evaluation of suspected pancreatic disease. On the basis of patient history, laboratory tests, and the results of routine TUS, one gastroenterologist, who was unaware of any of the other procedures or the final diagnosis, made a presumptive clinical diagnosis. CT and ERCP images and EUS videotapes were then analyzed by three different and independent examiners, who had the same clinical information except for the TUS results, but were completely blinded to the results of the other examinations and the patients' diagnoses. The final diagnoses were obtained by surgery, histology, and cytology, plus a follow-up of at least 1 yr (mean 35 months) in all noncancer cases. RESULTS: The final diagnoses were: normal pancreas (n = 36), chronic pancreatitis without a focal inflammatory mass (n = 53) or with a focal inflammatory mass (n = 18), and pancreatic malignancy (n = 77). Clinical evaluation, including ultrasonography, achieved a sensitivity for pancreatic disease of 94% but a specificity of only 35%. The figures for the sensitivity and specificity of the three imaging procedures were 93% and 94%, respectively, for EUS; 89% and 92% for ERCP; and 91% and 78% for CT (p < 0.05 for the specificity of clinical assessment vs all three imaging tests, p > 0.05 for comparison of the three imaging procedures). In the differential diagnosis between cancer and chronic pancreatitis as well as between malignant and inflammatory tumors, there was no difference among clinical assessment and the three imaging tests. CONCLUSIONS: In a group of patients with a high suspicion of pancreatic disease, little additional sensitivity in the diagnosis of pancreatic disease is provided by sophisticated imaging procedures such as EUS, ERCP, and CT, in comparison with clinical assessment including laboratory values and TUS. However, the specificity can be substantially improved. To confirm the diagnosis, one of the three examinations is needed, depending on the suspected disease and local expertise. The imaging procedures should be performed in a stepwise fashion for specific purposes, such as exclusion of pancreatic disease and the planning of treatment in chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.     

超声内镜对胆胰疾病诊断价值的探讨

目的 探讨超声内镜（EUS）对胆胰疾病的诊断价值。方法 采用超声胃镜（频率为7．5MHz和20Mnz），应用水囊法结合水充盈法，对54例临床疑为胆胰病变的患者进行EUS检查，并与腹部B超、CT及ERCP比较。结果 EUS、US、CT、ERCP对胆胰疾病诊断的阳性率分别为92．6％（50/54）、57．4％（31／54）、64．8％（35／54）及76．2％（32／42）。EUS对胰腺癌诊断的阳性率达100％。高于腹部B超、CT及ERCP；EUS对胆总管结石及慢性胰腺炎的准确率分别为100％和88．9％。结论 EUS对胆胰疾病的诊断率高于腹部B超，CT及ERCP影像检查，尤其对胆管扩张病因的定位及定性诊断均有较大的诊断价值。     

The detection and prognosis of small pancreatic carcinoma

During a period of 16 years, 203 proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas were studied. Tumor size was measured on either the resected or the autopsy specimen. Four tumors were smaller than 1 cm, and 17 tumors were between 1.1 and 2 cm. ERCP has been found to be the most accurate in the diagnosis of small pancreatic carcinoma. Followup of 44 patients in whom the tumor was resected showed that survival depended on tumor size. In four patients with tumors smaller than 1 cm without parenchymal invasion, the postoperative 5-yr cumulative survival rate was 100%. Pancreatic carcinoma smaller than 1 cm limited to duct epithelium is considered as early cancer. Various diagnostic imaging modalities are now available to evaluate patients in whom pancreatic carcinoma is clinically suspected. These include ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and angiography. More recently magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and peroral pancreatic ductal biopsy also have been used. This report compares diagnostic modalities for pancreatic carcinoma in order to provide a data base for their rational use in the diagnosis of small resectable pancreatic carcinomas.     

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of patients with solid pancreatic masses

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is the most sensitive imaging procedure for the detection of small solid pancreatic masses and is accurate in determining vascular invasion of the portal venous system. Even compared to the new CT techniques, EUS provides excellent results in preoperative staging of solid pancreatic tumors. Compared to helical CT techniques, EUS is less accurate in detecting tumor involvement of the superior mesenteric artery. EUS staging and EUS-guided FNA can be performed in a single-step procedure, to establish the diagnosis of cancer. There is no known negative impact of tumor cell seeding due to EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA). Without FNA, EUS and additional methods are not able to reliably distinguish between inflammatory and malignant masses.     

内镜超声检查术对胰腺肿瘤早期诊断的价值

目的探讨内镜超声检查术（EUS）、管内超声检查术（IDUS）及超声内镜引导下细针穿刺术（EUS-FNA）对胰腺肿瘤早期诊断的价值。方法回顾性分析和比较188例胰腺小占位病灶的EUS、IDUS、EUS—FNA及其他影像学检查结果。结果（1）EUS诊断小胰腺癌的准确率是95．6％（44／46）,优于B超58．6％（27／46）、CT77．4％（24／31）、MRI76．2％（16／21）及内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（ERCP）85．3％（29／34）。小胰腺癌EUS声像图主要表现为类圆形、边界清楚、边缘不规则的低回声肿块,内部回声多均匀。（2）25例胰腺小占位病灶行IDUS检查,其准确率是100．0％（25／25）,明显优于B超32．0％（8／25）、CT52．9％（9／17）及MRI57．9％（11／19）等检查。（3）18例胰腺小占位病灶行EUS—FNA,其准确率是66．7％（12／18）。（4）EUS诊断胰腺假性囊肿的准确率是100．0％（27／27）,明显优于13超52．0％（13／25）、CT66、7％（12／18）、MRI82．4％（14／17）及ERCP78．9％（15／19）;对胰腺囊性肿瘤分类鉴别诊断总的准确率是57．7％（15／26）,优于B超19．2％（5／26）、CT36．4％（8／22）、MRI37．5％（6／16）及ERCP50．0％（7／14）等检查。结论EUS、IDUS及EUS-FNA对胰腺肿瘤的早期诊断具有重要价值。     

Endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in the evaluation of pancreatic masses

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis of pancreatic tumors can be problematic. This study aimed to determine the performance of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy (EUS FNA) in pancreatic malignancy when prior biopsies performed by CT guidance or ERCP were negative. METHODS: A total of 185 patients with known or suspected pancreatic masses were prospectively evaluated with EUS FNA. Before EUS FNA, all patients were evaluated with abdominal CT (61 with CT-guided biopsy) and 91 with ERCP (41 had brushings or biopsy). RESULTS: EUS had greater sensitivity than CT in detecting a mass (99% vs 57%, p < 0.0001). In 58 patients with negative CT-guided biopsies, EUS FNA had 90% sensitivity for malignancy, 50% specificity for benign disease and 84% accuracy. Similarly, in 36 patients with negative ERCP tissue sampling, results for EUS FNA were 94%, 67% and 92%, respectively. Complications were mild and infrequent (0.5%). CONCLUSION: EUS FNA of pancreatic masses safely and accurately diagnoses pancreatic malignancy when prior biopsy techniques have been unsuccessful.     

Early pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Definition,diagnosis, and prognosis

Early pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas may be defined as tumors limited to the duct epithelium without invasion to the parenchyma. The majority of these tumors are less than 1 cm in diameter. The patient's symptoms and laboratory studies provide only limited assistance in the screening of small pancreatic carcinomas. Ultrasound (US), because of its ease of use and accuracy, is best suited as a screening procedure for small pancreatic carcinomas. Computed tomography (CT) is also valuable for such screening. When US and CT findings suggest the presence of small pancreatic carcinomas, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) should be employed; these latter two modalities can show very small tumors. Our follow up of patients with pancreatic ductal adeno-carcinoma in whom the tumor was resected showed that survial depended on tumor size. The postoperative 5-year cumulative survival rate of patients with tumors less than 1 cm in diameter was 100%.     

影像学检查在诊断慢性胰腺炎中的意义

目的　分析评价多种影像学检查在慢性胰腺炎诊断中的作用 ,有助于慢性胰腺炎的诊断。方法　回顾性总结北京协和医院 1991～ 2 0 0 0年间确诊的慢性胰腺炎患者 12 9例 ,分析体外超声 (US)、计算机X线断层摄影 (CT)、内镜逆行胰胆管造影 (ERCP)、超声内镜 (EUS)及磁共振胰胆管显影 (MR CP)在诊断慢性胰腺炎中的作用。结果　①EUS和MRCP诊断慢性胰腺炎的敏感性高 ,与ERCP的一致性较好。②ERCP的敏感性显著高于US与CT(P <0 .0 5 )。③US对胰管扩张检出的敏感性与特异性为 5 9.4 %与 93.8% ,CT分别为 6 0 .0 %与 95 .7%。④胰管病变重度组ERCP与BT PABA的一致率(87.5 % )较轻 中度组 (6 6 .7% )高。⑤慢性胰腺炎并发症越多 ,胰管病变程度越重。结论　在传统检查中 ,ERCP诊断慢性胰腺炎的敏感性最高 ;新近开展的EUS和MRCP敏感性高 ,且与ERCP有较好的一致性 ,是很有前途的检查方法     

ERCP or EUS for tissue diagnosis of biliary strictures? A prospective comparative study

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of ERCP-based brush cytology or forceps biopsy for tissue diagnosis is relatively low (usually not exceeding 70%). By contrast, reported accuracy rates for EUS-guided FNA of pancreatobiliary masses are over 80%. This prospective study compared these two modalities for the first time in the diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures and pancreatic tumors. METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients (29 men, 21 women; mean age 62.1 years) with obstructive jaundice in whom a tissue diagnosis was required were included. During ERCP, intraductal specimens were obtained with a forceps and with two different types of brush (conventional and spiral suction) in random order. During EUS, only visible mass lesions or localized bile duct wall thickening were aspirated (22-gauge needle), with at least two passes yielding material sufficient for assessment. A cytopathologist was not present in the procedure room to evaluate specimen adequacy. The reference methods were surgery, other biopsy results, follow-up until death, or the conclusion of the study (mean follow-up 20 months). RESULTS: The final diagnoses were malignancy, 28 (16 pancreatic, 12 biliary), and benign biliary stricture, 22. Sensitivity and specificity for ERCP-guided biopsy were 36% and 100%, respectively; for ERCP-guided cytology (when using conventional and spiral suction brushes), 46% and 100%, respectively; and for EUS-guided FNA, 43% and 100%, respectively. If the punctured lesions are considered (n=28) alone, the sensitivity of EUS-guided FNA was 75%. In general, sensitivity was better for ERCP-based techniques in the subgroup biliary tumor (ERCP 75% vs. EUS 25%), whereas EUS-guided biopsy was superior for pancreatic mass (EUS 60% vs. ERCP 38%). CONCLUSIONS: For biliary strictures, combined ERCP- and EUS-guided tissue acquisition seems to be the best approach to tissue diagnosis. From a clinical standpoint, it appears reasonable, when a tissue diagnosis is required, to start with ERCP if biliary malignancy is suspected and with EUS when a pancreatic tumor is thought to be the cause of a biliary stricture.     

Diagnosis of pancreatic cancer

The ability to diagnose pancreatic carcinoma has been rapidly improving with the recent advances in diagnostic techniques such as contrast-enhanced Doppler ultrasound (US), helical computed tomography (CT), enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and endoscopic US (EUS). Each technique has advantages and limitations, making the selection of the proper diagnostic technique, in terms of purpose and characteristics, especially important. Abdominal US is the modality often used first to identify a cause of abdominal pain or jaundice, while the accuracy of conventional US for diagnosing pancreatic tumors is only 50-70%. CT is the most widely used imaging examination for the detection and staging of pancreatic carcinoma. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is generally depicted as a hypoattenuating area on contrast-enhanced CT. The reported sensitivity of helical CT in revealing pancreatic carcinoma is high, ranging between 89% and 97%. Multi-detector-row (MD) CT may offer an improvement in the early detection and accurate staging of pancreatic carcinoma. It should be taken into consideration that some pancreatic adenocarcinomas are depicted as isoattenuating and that pancreatitis accompanied by pancreatic adenocarcinoma might occasionally result in the overestimation of staging. T1-weighted spin-echo images with fat suppression and dynamic gradient-echo MR images enhanced with gadolinium have been reported to be superior to helical CT for detecting small lesions. However, chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinoma are not distinguished on the basis of degree and time of enhancement on dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MRI. EUS is superior to spiral CT and MRI in the detection of small tumors, and can also localize lymph node metastases or vascular tumor infiltration with high sensitivity. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy is a safe and highly accurate method for tissue diagnosis of patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma. (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) has been suggested as a promising modality for noninvasive differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. Previous studies reported the sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET for detecting malignant pancreatic tumors as being 71-100% and 64-90%, respectively. FDG-PET does not replace, but is complementary to morphologic imaging, and therefore, in doubtful cases, the method must be combined with other imaging modalities.     

Role of EUS in the preoperative localization of insulinomas compared with spiral CT

BACKGROUND: Preoperative radiologic localization of insulinomas often fails because of the small size of these tumors. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can localize insulinomas in up to 80% of the cases. The aim of this study was to compare EUS and computed tomography (CT) diagnostic accuracy for insulinomas. METHODS: We reviewed medical records from 12 patients (10 women) with a biochemical diagnosis of hypoglycemia and hyperinsulinism from 1 university hospital and 1 community hospital. A diagnosis of insulinoma was ultimately made in all cases and before surgery the patients underwent abdominal US, spiral CT and EUS in an attempt to precisely localize the tumor. Surgery was considered the standard for tumor localization. RESULTS: Ten tumors were benign (83.3%) and 2 were malignant (16.7%). The overall sensitivity of EUS in identifying insulinomas was 83.3% compared with 16.7% for CT. Tumors not detected by EUS had a mean size of 0.75 cm. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration was possible in only 3 patients, with a positive cytologic diagnosis in 2 (66.6%). Tumors located in the head and body of the pancreas were identified by EUS in all patients, but those located in the tail were diagnosed in only 50% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is superior to spiral CT and should replace it for the detection of pancreatic insulinomas. EUS identification depends on the site and size of the tumor.     

超声内镜对胰管扩张性疾病的诊断价值

目的 探讨内镜超声检查术(EUS)在胰管扩张病因及恶性疾病邻近脏器浸润的诊断价值。方法 分析129例EUS检查发现胰管扩张的病因，并与同期接受CT检查(n＝40)与ERCP检查(n＝42)的结果相比较。对其中72例胰腺癌引起的胰管扩张病例，分析EUS对邻近脏器浸润检出率，并与CT、ERCP结果相比较。结果 129例胰管扩张病例中，胰腺癌、壶腹癌、慢性胰腺炎为常见病因。EUS对病因检出率较CT及ERCP高。EUS对胰腺癌邻近血管侵犯及淋巴结转移检出率较CT及ERCP高。结论 EUS对胰管扩张的病因诊断较CT及ERCP有明显的优越性，并能全面评估肿瘤的可切除性，指导制定治疗方案。     

Preoperative detection of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors using endoscopic ultrasonography.

OBJECTIVE: Almost 30% of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEPET) escape preoperative identification using standard imaging techniques. The goal of this retrospective study is to present our cumulative experience in the assessment of GEPET by preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and to compare it with a literature review. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with suspected specific hormonal syndromes were sequentially examined with US, CT, MRI, angiography, OctreoScan, and radial and sectorial EUS. Sixteen were males (43%) and 21 were females (57%), with a mean age of 61 years (interval: 40-84 a). Of all 37 patients, 27 had 19 endocrine tumors in the pancreas and 14 tumors in their gastrointestinal tract. No tumors were demonstrated in 10 patients, hence they were used as a control group. Of all 37 patients, 24 were operated on or had histological samples collected, with the presence of 26 GEPET (10 carcinoids) being confirmed in 22 patients. RESULTS: EUS sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy were 81% and 78%. Specificity was 80%. All these values were similar to the mean values obtained from the literature review. Three pancreatic rumors smaller than or equal to 1 cm (insulinomas) were detected, which had escaped diagnosis with previous US, CT, and MRI studies. An echoendoscopic examination of the pancreas could not be completed in two cases (5%), a pancreas carcinoid and an already gastrectomized double pancreatic gastrinoma. CONCLUSION: EUS is a good preoperative technique for GEPET detection, and may likely be superior to other imaging techniques in the assessment of small tumors. The usefulness of EUS as a primary exploration after US or HCT has been posited for tumor diagnosis and localization before surgery.     

A prospective study of complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound in an ambulatory endoscopy center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Our aim was to assess the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in an ambulatory endoscopy center (AEC). METHODS: Complications occurring in consecutive patients undergoing ERCP or EUS from March 2003 to February 2004 at our AEC were recorded prospectively. Comprehensive complications were defined as consensus criteria plus other adverse events: use of reversal agents, unplanned hospital admission, hospitalization beyond planned 23-hour observation, unplanned emergency department or primary care provider visit, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 497 patients (median age, 57 y; 82% American Society of Anesthesiologists class II or III) underwent 685 procedures. Monitored or general anesthesia was used in 25% of EUS and 50% of ERCP procedures. ERCP interventions were as follows: biliary or pancreatic stenting (N = 168), stone extraction (N = 70), sphincterotomy (N = 62), sphincter of Oddi manometry (N = 53), other (N = 66). EUS indications were as follows: known or suspected pancreatic mass (N = 103), upper-gastrointestinal mass/submucosal lesion (N = 71), luminal malignancy staging (N = 40), other (N = 96); 52% had EUS fine-needle aspiration. There was follow-up evaluation in 94% of the patients. There were 43 comprehensive ERCP complications (12.9%), 18 (5.4%) of these fit consensus criteria: pancreatitis (N = 14), cholangitis (N = 2), and perforation (N = 2). There were 9 comprehensive EUS complications (2.9%), 2 (.7%) of these fit consensus criteria: pancreatitis (N = 1) and bleeding (N = 1). Other adverse events for ERCP and EUS were as follows: prolongation of 23-hour observation (N = 14), emergency room visits (N = 3), primary care physician visits (N = 6), use of reversal agents (N = 3), unplanned admissions (N = 2), infection (N = 3), and death (N = 1). CONCLUSIONS: ERCP and EUS can be performed in an AEC, provided mechanisms for admission and anesthesia support are in place. The assessment of comprehensive complications is more reflective of adverse events related to ERCP and EUS than consensus criteria alone.     

超声内镜弹性成像在良恶性胰腺病变鉴别中的应用价值

目的:探讨超声内镜弹性成像(endoscopic ultrasound,EUS)在胰腺占位病变良恶性鉴别中的应用价值.方法:影像学结果并经超声内镜检查确定有胰腺占位性病变的患者入选,对目标病变行超声内镜弹性成像检查,按照弹性成像5分法对组织弹性成像进行评分,将弹性成像评分为12分归为良性,3-5分归为恶性病变.结果:自2009-06/2011-06,共27例符合标准的胰腺占位病变患者入选,其中胰腺癌19例,超声内镜弹性成像评分3分(n=11)、4分(n=5)、5分(n=3),无功能性良性内分泌肿瘤(4分)及低度恶性神经内分泌肿瘤(5分)各1例,炎性病变6例,评分1分(n=1)、2分(n=3)、3分(n=2).超声内镜弹性成像对27例胰腺占位病变良恶性鉴别中24例诊断准确,诊断灵敏度100%,特异度57.14%,阳性预测值86.96%,阴性预测值100%.结论:超声内镜弹性成像对胰腺良恶性病变的鉴别具有较高的准确性,可望为疾病诊断提供新的影像学手段,但其仍为一种影像学手段,具有一定的局限性,并不替代胰腺的细胞病理学检查.     

Endoscopic therapy in acute recurrent pancreatitis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography （ERCP） has evolved from a largely diagnostic to a largely therapeutic modality. Cross-sectional imaging, such as computed tomography （CT） and magnetic resonance imaging （MRI）, and less invasive endoscopy, especially endoscopic ultrasound （EUS）, have largely taken over from ERCP for diagnosis. However, ERCP remains the ＂first line＂ therapeutic tool in the management of mechanical causes of acute recurrent pancreatitis, including bile duct stones （choledocholithiasis）, ampullary masses （benign and malignant）, congenital variants of biliary and pancreatic anatomy （e.g. pancreas divisum, choledochoceles）, sphincter of Oddi dysfunction （SOD）, pancreatic stones and strictures, and parasitic disorders involving the biliary tree and/or pancreatic duct （e.g Ascariasis, Clonorchiasis）.     

Endoscopic ultrasound is highly accurate and directs management in patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas

Preoperative localization of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with traditional imaging fails in 40-60% of patients. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is highly sensitive in the detection of these tumors. Previous reports included relatively few patients or required the collaboration of multiple centers. We report the results of EUS evaluation of 82 patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS: We prospectively used EUS early in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with biochemical or clinical evidence of neuroendocrine tumors. Patients had surgical confirmation of tumor localization or clinical follow-up of >1 yr. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients underwent 91 examinations (cases). Thirty patients had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 1. One hundred pancreatic tumors were visualized by EUS in 54 different patients. The remaining 28 patients had no pancreatic tumor or an extrapancreatic tumor. Surgical/pathological confirmation was obtained in 75 patients. The mean tumor diameter was 1.51 cm and 71% of the tumors were < or =2.0 cm in diameter. Of the 54 explorations with surgical confirmation of a pancreatic tumor, EUS correctly localized the tumor in 50 patients (93%). Twenty-nine insulinomas, 18 gastrinomas, as well as one glucagonoma, one carcinoid tumor, and one somatostatinoma were localized. The most common site for tumor localization was the pancreatic head (46 patients). Most tumors were hypoechoic, homogenous, and had distinct margins. EUS of the pancreas was correctly negative in 20 of 21 patients (specificity, 95%). EUS was more accurate than angiography with or without stimulation testing (secretin for gastrinoma, calcium for insulinoma), transcutaneous ultrasound, and CT in those patients undergoing further imaging procedures. EUS was not reliable in localizing extrapancreatic tumors. CONCLUSIONS: In this series, the largest single center experience reported to date, EUS had an overall sensitivity and accuracy of 93% for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Our results support the use of EUS as a primary diagnostic modality in the evaluation and management of patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas.     

Values and limitations of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography with preoperative evaluation of patients with pancreatic masses

The aim of this study was to determine the value and limitations of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-position-emission tomography (PET) for differentiating benign and malignant pancreatic disease and for staging malignant disease. One hundred fifty-nine patients with 89 malignant and 70 benign pancreatic lesions all received PET, computed tomography (CT), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) before pancreatic surgery. The original reports were compared for all patients (group I; N = 159), for a subgroup that neither had fasting plasma glucose levels > or =130 mg/dL or known elevated levels of C-reactive protein ([CRP], group II; n = 123), and for the remaining patients (group III; n = 36). For group I, accuracy values (areas under receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curves) for differentiation of benign/malignant masses were 0.86 (PET), 0.93 (ERCP), 0.82 (CT), and 0.95 for ERCP + PET (N = 159). For group II, ROC areas increased to 0.92 (PET), 0.94 (p < 0.05; n = 123) (ERCP), 0.82 (CT), 0.97 (p < 0.05; n = 123) (ERCP + PET). The results for group III were 0.71 (PET), 0.81 (CT), and 0.93 (ERCP); (n = 36). With 54 patients of group II that either had contradictory or indeterminate/technically unsuccessful CT/ERCP, PET was correct in 43 patients (84%). Sensitivity/specificity for lymph node staging was 49%/63%, respectively. For patients with hepatic metastasis, PET was 70% sensitive and 95% specific, missing some metastasis that were <1 cm. PET detected peritoneal metastasis in 25% of patients, missing poorly localized microscopic spread. For selected patients who have indeterminate pancreatic masses but no hyperglycemia or serologic evidence of active inflammation, FDG-PET is an independent functional assay that significantly adds to the diagnostic accuracy of ERCP and CT in the differentiation of benign and malignant pancreatic disease. PET can reliably detect hepatic, peritoneal, and other distant metastases that are > or =1 cm.