Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis

The diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis is based on altered pancreatic morphology and function. A spectrum of disease exists, and milder forms of disease may be missed by CT but demonstrated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). The accuracy of ERCP and EUS for diagnosis of “minimal change” or “early” chronic pancreatitis is controversial, particularly when the results from these imaging procedures are discordant with each other or with tests of pancreatic function; in some cases ERCP and EUS should be considered indeterminate for diagnosis. This review discusses recent data concerning the accuracy of ERCP and EUS for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis, the use of EUS fine-needle aspiration for differential diagnosis of pancreatic masses, and the use of EUS and EUS-guided TruCut biopsy for diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis.     

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     

Diagnosis of early chronic pancreatitis by endoscopic ultrasound. Are we there yet?

The diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis at an early stage is a clinical challenge. A major limitation is the inability of clinicians to obtain a tissue or histological sample to confirm the clinical diagnosis. Currently available imaging modalities have limited sensitivity or specificity for diagnosing early chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), introduced in the early 1980's, was first developed to image the pancreas. It overcame many of the limitations (abdominal gas and fat) of transabdominal ultrasonography when evaluating patients for possible pancreatic diseases. To date, EUS represents the most promising imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis. Contrary to endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP), EUS has a very low risk of complications and can detect abnormalities suggestive of chronic pancreatitis in the pancreatic parenchyma and ductal system which are not visible on any other imaging modality. The minimal changes in echotexture are difficult to interpret because there is no reliable gold standard confirmatory test. There is now some evidence in the literature suggesting that these early changes detected by EUS correlate with the histological changes of chronic pancreatitis and may predict progression to more advanced disease. The EUS diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis relies on quantitative (more than qualitative) parenchymal and ductal criteria found during evaluation of the pancreas. It is generally accepted that, in the absence of any criteria, chronic pancreatitis is unlikely, whereas in the presence of 5 or more criteria (out of 9-11) chronic pancreatitis is likely although ERCP and pancreatic function tests may still be normal. The diagnostic significance of patients with fewer (1-4) criteria found on EUS is currently unclear, particularly when other diagnostic tests such as ERCP and function testing are normal. In these cases, there is a potential for "over-diagnosis" of chronic pancreatitis, since the EUS changes cannot be confirmed by other modalities. How can we better understand the implications of EUS detected changes when other tests are normal?     

Evaluating the role of imaging methods in the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of imaging methods in the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis (CP) in improving the accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of CP. METHODS: The results of the imaging methods used for 129 cases diagnosed as CP in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from 1991 to 2000 were retrospectively analyzed. The imaging methods included ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). RESULTS: The sensitivity of EUS and MRCP was high and was in good agreement with ERCP in the diagnosis of CP. The sensitivity of ERCP was superior to US and CT (P < 0.05). The sensitivity of US and CT for diagnosing dilation of the pancreatic duct was 59.4% and 60%, respectively, the specificity was 93.8% and 95.7%, respectively. BT‐PABA had a better correlation with ERCP in the group with severe changes of the pancreatic duct than in the mild or moderate group. The more complications of CP that were present, the more severe the lesions of the pancreatic duct. CONCLUSION: Among the traditional imaging modalities for diagnosing CP, ERCP is the most sensitive. MRCP and EUS, the promising and novel examination techniques, have high sensitivity and good agreement with ERCP.     

Advanced Imaging of Chronic Pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis is characterized by continuing inflammation, destruction, and irreversible morphological changes in the pancreatic parenchyma and ductal anatomy. These changes lead to chronic pain and/or loss of function. Although these definitions are simple, the clinical diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis remains difficult to make, especially for early disease. Routine imaging modalities such as transabdominal ultrasound and standard CT scans are insensitive for depicting early disease, and detect only advanced chronic pancreatitis. Advances in imaging modalities including CT, MRI with gadolinium contrast enhancement, MRI with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRI/MRCP), MRI/MRCP with secretin-stimulation (S-MRCP), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) allow earlier diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. This article reviews the recognized findings, advantages, and disadvantages of the various imaging modalities in the management of chronic pancreatitis, specifically CT, MRI with or without MRCP and/or S-MRCP, ERCP, and EUS.     

A prospective comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of ERCP,MRCP, CT,and EUS in biliary strictures

BACKGROUND: The differential diagnosis of biliary strictures remains a challenge. This study evaluated magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) as a new procedure in comparison with the established methods of diagnosis including ERCP or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC), CT, and EUS. METHODS: Fifty patients (21 men, 29 women, mean age 65.7 years) with jaundice but no pain suspected to have biliary strictures were enrolled in this prospective study. MRCP, ERCP/PTC, CT, and EUS were performed prospectively; images and videotapes (EUS) of these tests were reviewed blindly under standardized conditions. Reference standards for comparison were surgery, a biopsy confirming malignancy, or the clinical course during follow-up (at least 12 months) in cases without histopathologic proof of malignancy. RESULTS: Seven patients ultimately proved to have jaundice caused by parenchymal liver disease and 43 had a biliary stricture (17 benign, 26 malignant). Forty patients underwent all 4 imaging tests. There were 10 patients in whom patient-specific problems precluded some procedures but who were included in an intention-to-diagnose analysis. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of malignancy in the 50 patients were as follows: 85% / 75% for ERCP/PTC, 85% / 71% for MRCP, 77% / 63% for CT, and 79% / 62% for EUS, with similar values in the 40 patients who underwent all 4 imaging methods. The combination of MRCP and EUS improved specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Although MRCP provides the same imaging information as direct cholangiography, it has limited specificity for the diagnosis of malignant strictures. In the differential diagnosis of biliary strictures, several tests including ERCP-guided tissue diagnosis are still required, and MRCP has only a limited clinical role.     

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。     

Endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic tumor diagnosis

In a prospective study from 1988 to 1990, 132 patients with suspected pancreatic tumor were examined with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), transabdominal ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), and ERCP. The final diagnosis of 102 pancreatic tumors of different origin (76 malignant and 26 inflammatory tumors) and the exclusion of a pancreatic tumor in 30 patients was made by operation (N = 47), puncture (N = 36), autopsy (N = 3), or follow-up of a mean of 51 weeks (N = 46). Sensitivity and specificity in pancreatic tumor diagnosis were significantly higher for EUS (99% and 100%) than for US (67%/40%) and CT (77%/53%) and equal to ERCP (sensitivity 90%). This was even more obvious in small pancreatic tumors of 3 cm and less. However, as with the other imaging procedures, EUS was not able to differentiate reliably malignant from inflammatory pancreatic masses (accuracy 76% for malignancy and 46% for focal inflammation). From analysis of the endosonographic pattern of pancreatic tumors, no consistent morphologic features were identified which could have been specifically attributed to malignant or inflammatory masses. Our results show that EUS is superior to US and CT and equal to ERCP in pancreatic tumor diagnosis. In contrast to the indirect evidence obtained by ERCP, EUS provides direct visualization of tumor size and shape in almost all patients examined. Thus, EUS should be considered early in the evaluation of patients with suspected pancreatic tumors.     

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.     

The role of EUS in relation to other imaging modalities in the differential diagnosis between mass forming chronic pancreatitis, autoimmune pancreatitis and ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions remains as an important clinical challenge, mainly for the differentiation between mass forming chronic pancreatitis, autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can all provide valuable and complementary information in this setting. Among them, EUS has the unique ability to obtain specimens for histopathological diagnosis and can therefore play a crucial role in the evaluation patients with inconclusive findings on initial examinations. Nowadays, new developed techniques associated to EUS, like elastography and contrast enhancement, have shown promising results for the differential diagnosis of these pancreatic lesions.     

Imaging tests for accurate diagnosis of acute biliary pancreatitis

Gallstones represent the most frequent aetiology of acute pancreatitis in many statistics all over the world, estimated between 40%-60%. Accurate diagnosis of acute biliary pancreatitis(ABP) is of outmost importance because clearance of lithiasis [gallbladder and common bile duct(CBD)] rules out recurrences. Confirmation of biliary lithiasis is done by imaging. The sensitivity of the ultrasonography(US) in the detection of gallstones is over 95% in uncomplicated cases, but in ABP, sensitivity for gallstone detection is lower, being less than 80% due to the ileus and bowel distension. Sensitivity of transabdominal ultrasonography(TUS) for choledocolithiasis varies between 50%-80%, but the specificity is high, reaching 95%. Diameter of the bile duct may be orientative for diagnosis. Endoscopic ultrasonography(EUS) seems to be a more effectivetool to diagnose ABP rather than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP),which should be performed only for therapeutic purposes.As the sensitivity and specificity of computerized tomography are lower as compared to state-of-the-art magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography(MRCP)or EUS,especially for small stones and small diameter of CBD,the later techniques are nowadays preferred for the evaluation of ABP patients.ERCP has the highest accuracy for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis and is used as a reference standard in many studies,especially after sphincterotomy and balloon extraction of CBD stones.Laparoscopic ultrasonography is a useful tool for the intraoperative diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.Routine exploration of the CBD in cases of patients scheduled for cholecystectomy after an attack of ABP was not proven useful.A significant rate of the so-called idiopathic pancreatitis is actually caused by microlithiasis and/or biliary sludge.In conclusion,the general algorithm for CBD stone detection starts with anamnesis,serum biochemistry and then TUS,followed by EUS or MRCP.In the end,bile duct microscopic analysis may be performed by bile harvested during ERCP in case of recurrent attacks of ABP and these should be followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Can endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography replace ERCP in patients with suspected biliary disease? A prospective trial and cost analysis

OBJECTIVES: ERCP is the gold standard for pancreaticobiliary evaluation but is associated with complications. Less invasive diagnostic alternatives with similar capabilities may be cost-effective, particularly in situations involving low prevalence of disease. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and ERCP in the same patients with suspected extrahepatic biliary disease. The economic outcomes of EUS-, MRCP-, and ERCP-based diagnostic strategies were evaluated. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients referred for ERCP with suspected biliary disease. MRCP and EUS were performed within 24 h before ERCP. The investigators were blinded to the results of the alternative imaging studies. A cost-utility analysis was performed for initial ERCP, MRCP, and EUS strategies for these patients. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were studied. ERCP cholangiogram failed in one patient, and another patient did not complete MRCP because of claustrophobia. The final diagnoses (N = 28) were CBD stone (mean = 4 mm; range = 3-6 mm) in five patients; biliary stricture in three patients, and normal biliary tree in 20. Two patients had pancreatitis after therapeutic ERCP, one after precut sphincterotomy followed by a normal cholangiogram. EUS was more sensitive than MRCP in the detection of choledocolithiasis (80% vs 40%), with similar specificity. MRCP had a poor specificity and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of biliary stricture (76%/25%) compared to EUS (100%/100%), with similar sensitivity. The overall accuracy of MRCP for any abnormality was 61% (95% CI = 0.41-0.78) compared to 89% (CI = 0.72-0.98) for EUS. Among those patients with a normal biliary tree, the proportion correctly identified with each test was 95% for EUS and 65% for MRCP (p < 0.02). The cost for each strategy per patient evaluated was $1346 for ERCP, $1111 for EUS, and $1145 for MRCP. CONCLUSIONS: In this patient population with a low disease prevalence, EUS was superior to MRCP for choledocholithiasis. EUS was most useful for confirming a normal biliary tree and should be considered a low-risk alternative to ERCP. Although MRCP had the lowest procedural reimbursement, the initial EUS strategy had the greatest cost-utility by avoiding unnecessary ERCP examinations.     

Screening for early pancreatic neoplasia in high-risk individuals: a prospective controlled study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Individuals with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer and persons with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS) have an increased risk for pancreatic cancer. This study screened for early pancreatic neoplasia and compared the pancreatic abnormalities in high-risk individuals and control subjects. METHODS: High-risk individuals with PJS or a strong family history of pancreatic cancer were prospectively evaluated with baseline and 12-month computed tomography (CT) scan and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). If EUS was abnormal, EUS-fine-needle aspiration and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) were performed. Surgery was offered to patients with potentially neoplastic lesions. Radiologic findings and pathologic diagnoses were compared. Patients undergoing EUS and/or ERCP for benign non-pancreatic indications were concurrently enrolled as control subjects. RESULTS: Seventy-eight high-risk patients (72 from familial pancreatic cancer kindreds, 6 PJS) and 149 control patients were studied. To date, 8 patients with pancreatic neoplasia have been confirmed by surgery or fine-needle aspiration (10% yield of screening); 6 patients had 8 benign intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), 1 had an IPMN that progressed to invasive ductal adenocarcinoma, and 1 had pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia. EUS and CT also diagnosed 3 patients with 5 extrapancreatic neoplasms. At EUS and ERCP abnormalities suggestive of chronic pancreatitis were more common in high-risk patients than in control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Screening EUS and CT diagnosed significant asymptomatic pancreatic and extrapancreatic neoplasms in high-risk individuals. IPMN should be considered a part of the phenotype of familial pancreatic cancer. Abnormalities suggestive of chronic pancreatitis are identified more commonly at EUS and ERCP in high-risk individuals.     

肿块型慢性胰腺炎11例的临床及影像学特征

目的 分析肿块型慢性胰腺炎的临床和影像学特点,并与胰腺肿瘤相鉴别.方法 回顾性分析11例肿块型慢性胰腺炎的临床、影像学、实验室和病理特征.结果 肿块型慢性胰腺炎多见于老年人、男性患者,临床主要表现为梗阻性黄疸和腹部不适.血清CA19-9水平可轻度升高,通常＜100U/ml,较胰腺癌低.B超对肿块型CP诊断的准确率仅18.2%,只能作为初筛手段;CT的诊断准确率为45.5%,表现为主胰管及其分支呈球样扩张,可见胰腺假性囊肿和钙化;MRCP和EUS均可见胆总管、胰管不规则扩张,表现与胰腺癌相似;ERCP可清楚显示胰胆管的病变部位、梗阻性质、胰胆管的狭窄及扩张情况等,与CT检查结合,对鉴别肿块型CP与胰头癌有重要意义.根据组织病理检查,少部分肿块型慢性胰腺炎属于自身免疫性胰腺炎.结论肿块型慢性胰腺炎临床和影像学特征与胰腺癌相似,需结合病史、临床表现、实验室及影像学检查、组织病理综合判断.     

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。     

Recent advances and novel methods in pancreatic imaging

Traditional imaging studies for evaluating pancreatic disease including abdominal ultrasound (US) and computerized tomography (CT) are widely utilized due to their availability, non-invasiveness, and familiarity to practitioners. The addition of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) has contributed significantly to the clinician's the ability to safely sample tissue, stage malignancy, evaluate the pancreatic ductal anatomy, and look for subtle parenchymal changes in the setting of chronic pancreatitis. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has diminished with the use of these less invasive modalities. Limitations in these conventional techniques include a lack of sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing early chronic pancreatitis, difficulties in differentiating malignancy from chronic or focal pancreatitis, and accuracy of staging pancreatic malignancy, particularly with regard to vascular involvement. Several recent advances in traditional imaging techniques have been described, which may improve our ability to accurately diagnose and stage pancreatic disease. Advances have been made in the standard modalities for imaging the pancreas such as multidetector CT, micro-bubble contrast enhanced ultrasound, and secretin stimulated MRCP. Other novel methods of pancreatic imaging have recently been described including EUS elastography, optical coherence tomography, diffusion weighted MRI, and MR spectroscopy. This article will review the recent advances in both traditional pancreatic imaging modalities as well as some of the emerging technologies for imaging evaluating diseases of the pancreas. As experience and clinical evidence accumulate, the role of these imaging techniques will continue to evolve.     

Endoscopic sonography in the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis in the early stage

The author summarizes in the submitted review diagnostic possibilities of early stages of chronic pancreatitis. He evaluates from that aspect possibilities of common imaging methods (ultrasonography, computer tomography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Evaluation of the secretory exocrine capacity by means of the secretin-cerulein test. Although the method is demanding from the aspect of routine diagnosis, it is a method with comparable sensitivity and perhaps even greater specificity than ERCP. Other tests of exocrine pancreatic secretion are not sufficiently sensitive to be used for this diagnosis. Among imaging methods ERCP which is still considered the gold standard, evaluates even subtle changes in the efferent system. Endoscopic ultrasonography visualizes rather discrete changes of the parenchymatous structure, areas of fibrosis and oedema, or changes in the echogenicity of the duct wall. At present in the diagnosis of early stages of chronic pancreatitis most probably a combination of the method evaluating the exocrine secretory capacity of the pancreas and sensitive imaging methods (ERCP) will be most satisfactory. Further studies will show whether and when EUS could replace ERCP.     

Treatment of pancreatic strictures

Opinion statement The diagnosis and treatment of patients with pancreatic strictures presents a multitude of clinical challenges. The etiology of pancreatic strictures is varied, including benign strictures subsequent to acute pancreatitis, trauma, postsurgical, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and malignancy. Patients with strictures usually present with symptoms of recurrent pancreatitis, abdominal pain, weight loss, and/or steatorrhea. The absence of a prior history of pancreatitis or surgery increases the likelihood of malignancy. High-quality imaging studies of the pancreas, CT, MRI/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) scanning are utilized for better definition. Imaging detects an associated mass and/or demonstrates the ductal anatomy. Invasive procedures such as ERCP are performed to better define the causal relationships of the patient’s symptoms or to obtain tissue diagnosis. Treatment goals include ameliorating symptoms, dilating the stricture, and ruling out cancer. The risk of malignancy underlies much of the intervention, which includes serology, cytologic analysis, and serial imaging. EUS has become the procedure of choice to rule out a mass, to evaluate the parenchyma for evidence of chronic pancreatitis, and to obtain fine-needle biopsies for tissue confirmation. In symptomatic patients or patients with indeterminate strictures, ERCP is used for direct pancreatography, tissue acquisition, and endoscopic treatment. Endotherapy includes sphincterotomy, dilation, and stenting to provide drainage. We view ERCP as the optimal first-line treatment modality. ERCP offers the potential of curative treatment and is less invasive than surgery, especially as some patients’ symptoms are not severe enough to justify surgery. If patients do not experience relief of symptoms after several sessions of endoscopic therapy, surgery is the logical next step for definitive, long-term treatment.     

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound in characterizing mass lesions in chronic pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND GOALS: The aim of this study is to determine the influence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the detection of chronic pancreatitis and identification of pancreatic masses suspected by other radiographic imaging modalities in such a clinical background. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on 105 consecutive pancreatic EUS examinations in an 18-month period at a single tertiary care referral center. Analysis included 75 patients with a suspected pancreatic mass by computerized axial tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreotography. All patients underwent EUS examination and if a mass was visualized, fine-needle aspiration biopsy was performed. Patients underwent either surgical exploration or clinical and radiographic follow-up for 6 months to confirm EUS findings. RESULTS: Chronic pancreatitis was suspected in 53 individuals by clinical or radiographic methods. Using standard EUS parenchymal and ductal criteria, chronic pancreatitis was confirmed in 41 (77%) of patients. In 33 patients with chronic pancreatitis detected by EUS, initial referral was for pancreatic mass. Twenty-eight (85%) patients had an actual mass and the remainder were false-positive clinical findings. Thirty-two percent of pancreatic masses in chronic pancreatitis were found to be malignant adenocarcinoma and the rest were inflammatory in nature. Subset analysis showed EUS-fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions to have a sensitivity and specificity of 87.9% and 100%, respectively. Detection of cystic lesions had a sensitivity and specificity of 88.5% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is superior to other radiographic modalities in the determination of chronic pancreatitis and detection of mass lesions.