Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Unnecessary Tests and Procedures in Patients Presenting with Solid Tumors of the Pancreas

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Background

A computed tomography (CT) scan is often the only study needed prior to surgery for resectable solid pancreas masses. However, many patients are evaluated with multiple studies and interventions that may be unnecessary.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who presented to the Johns Hopkins Multidisciplinary Pancreas Cancer Clinic with a clearly resectable solid pancreas mass, >1 cm in size over a 2-year period (6/2007–6/2009) and underwent resection. Pancreas specialists reviewed patient records and identified an index CT with a solid pancreas mass deemed to be resectable for curative intent. Data were collected on all studies and interventions between the index CT and the surgery.

Results

A total of 101 patients had an index CT. Following the index CT and before surgery, 78 patients had at least one CT, 19 had magnetic resonance imaging, 9 had a positron emission tomography scan, and 66 underwent pancreatic biopsy. Patients underwent a mean of three studies with a mean added cost of $3,371 per patient. Preoperative tests and interventions were associated with a longer time to definitive surgical intervention.

Conclusion

Wide variation exists for evaluation of newly discovered resectable solid pancreas masses, which is associated with delays to surgical intervention and added costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wilson CB. Adoption of new surgical technology. BMJ. 2006; January 14; 332(7533): 112–114.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barkun JS, Aronson JK, Feldman LS, Maddern GJ, Strasberg SM. Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations. Lancet 2009; 374:1089–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ergina PL, Cook JA, Blazeby JM, Boutron, I, Clavien P, Reeves BC, Seiler CM. Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation. Lancet 2009; 374:1097–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum, DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC. Nicholl J; Balliol Collaboration, Aronson JK, Barkun JS, Blazeby JM, Boutron IC, Campbell WB, Clavien PA, Cook JA, Ergina PL, Feldman LS, Flum DR, Maddern GJ, Nicholl J, Reeves BC, Seiler CM, Strasberg SM, Meakins JL, Ashby D, Black N, Bunker J, Burton M, Campbell M, Chalkidou K, Chalmers I, de Leval M, Deeks J, Ergina PL, Grant A, Gray M, Greenhalgh R, Jenicek M, Kehoe S, Lilford R, Littlejohns P, Loke Y, Madhock R, McPherson K, Meakins J, Rothwell P, Summerskill B, Taggart D, Tekkis P, Thompson M, Treasure T, Trohler U, Vandenbroucke J. No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 2009; 374: 1105–12

  5. Vincent A, Herman J, Schulick R, Hruban RH, Goggins M. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet 2011; 378(9791):607–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Sitzman JV, Hruban RH, Goodman SN, Dooley WC, Coleman J, Pitt HA. Pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer of the head of the pancreas. 201 patients. Ann Surg. 1995; 221:721–733.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Soriano A, Castells A, Ayuso C, Ayuso JR, de Caralt MT, Gines MA, Real MI, Gilabert R, Quinto L, Trilla A, Feu F, Montaya X, Fernandez-Cruz L, Navarro S. 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. 2004 Mar; 99(3): 492–501.

  8. Evans DB, Farnell MB, Lillemoe KD, Vollmer C Jr, Strasberg SM, Schulick RD. Surgical treatment of resectable and borderline resectable pancreas cancer: expert consensus statement. Ann Surg Oncol 2009 Jul; 16(7); 1736–44.

  9. Karmazanovsky G, Federov V, Kubyshkin V, Kotchatkov A. Pancreatic head cancer: accuracy of CT in determination of resectability. Abdom Imaging 2005; 30(4): 488–500.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kinney T. Evidence-based imaging of pancreatic malignancies. Surg Clin North Am. 2010 Apr; 90(2): 235–49.

  11. Clarke DL, Thomson SR, Madiba TE, Sanyika C. Preoperative imaging of pancreatic cancer: a management-oriented approach. J Am Coll Surg 2003; 196 (1):119–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Diehl SJ, Lehmann KJ, Sadick M, Lachmann R, Georgi M. Pancreatic cancer: value of dual phase helical CT in assessing resectability. Radiology 1998; 206:373–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Parsons CM, Sutcliffe JL, Bold RJ. Preoperative evaluation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2008; 15: 429–435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Legmann P, Vignaux O, Dousset B, Baraza AJ, Palazzo L, Dumontier I, Coste J, Louvel A, Roseau G, Couturier D, Bonnin A. Pancreatic tumors: comparison of dual-phase helical CT and endoscopic sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:1315–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lu DS, Reber HA, Krasny RM, Kadell BM, Sayre J. Local staging of pancreatic cancer: criteria for unresectability of major vessels as revealed by pancreatic-phase, thin-section helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168(6):1439–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bipat S, Phoa SS, van Delden OM, Bossuyt PM, Gouma DJ, Lameris JS, Stoker J. Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis and determining respectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005; 29(4):438–435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Vargas R, Nino-Murcia M, Trueblood W, Jeffrey RB Jr. MDCT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: prediction of vascular invasion and resectability using a multiphasic technique with curved planar reformations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182 (2):419–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Brown ML, Riley GF, Schussler N, Etzioni R. Estimating health care costs related to cancer treatment from SEER-Medicare data. Med Care 2002; 40(8 Suppl). IV-104-17.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cancer Trends Progress Report-2009/2010 Update. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS. Retrieved Nov 1, 2010 from http://progressreport.cancer.gov.

  20. Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A, Varadarajulu S, Wilcox CM. Frequency of major complications after EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective evaluation. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63(4); 622 – 29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G, Niro G, Valvano MR, Spirito F, Pilotto A, Foriano R. Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Aug; 102(8):1781–7.

  22. Paquin SC, Gariepy G, Lepanto L, Bourdages R, Raymond G, Sahai AV. A first report of tumor seeding because of EUS-guided FNA of a pancreatic adenocarcinoma, Gastrointest Endosc 2005 Apr; 61(4): 610–611.

  23. Shah JN, Fraker D, Guerry D, Feldman M, Kochman ML. Melanoma seeding of an EUS-guided fine needle track. Gastrointest Endosc 2004 Jun; 59(7): 923–924.

  24. Fisher L, Segarajasingam DS, Stewart C, Deboer WB, Yussof IF. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: performance and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009 Jan; 24(1): 90–96.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Al-Haddad M, Wallace MB, Woodward TA, Gross SA, Hodgens CM, Toton RD, Raimondo M. The safety of fine-needle aspiration guided by endoscopic ultrasound: a prospective study, Endoscopy 2009 Mar; 40(3): 204–208.

  26. United States Census Bureau (2010). Retrieved July 1, 2012 from www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Michol Cooper, Naeem A. Newman, Andrew M. Ibrahim, Christopher L. Wolfgang, Timothy M. Pawlik, John L. Cameron & Martin A. Makary

  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Edwin Lam & Joseph M. Herman

  3. Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Vikesh K. Singh

  4. General Surgery Resident, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Halsted 610, 600 N. Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA

    Michol Cooper

Authors
  1. Michol Cooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naeem A. Newman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew M. Ibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Edwin Lam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Joseph M. Herman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vikesh K. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christopher L. Wolfgang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Timothy M. Pawlik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. John L. Cameron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Martin A. Makary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michol Cooper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cooper, M., Newman, N.A., Ibrahim, A.M. et al. Unnecessary Tests and Procedures in Patients Presenting with Solid Tumors of the Pancreas. J Gastrointest Surg 17, 1218–1223 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-013-2213-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-013-2213-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation