Preoperative Imaging for Resectable Periampullary Cancer: Clinicopathologic Implications of Reported Radiographic Findings
- 494 Downloads
High-resolution, multiphase, computed tomography (CT) is a standard preoperative test prior to pancreatectomy, yet the clinical significance of routinely reported findings remains unknown.
We identified patients who underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy for a periampullary adenocarcinoma (PA) over the previous 5 years and had a pancreas protocol CT at our institution. Clinicopathologic implications of reported CT findings were evaluated.
There were 155 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDA) and 47 non-pancreatic PAs. No mass was visualized on CT in 6 % of PDAs and 23 % of non-pancreatic PA. A size discrepancy of ≥1 cm between radiographic and pathologic tumor diameters was observed in 40 % of PAs, with CT underestimating the size in most instances (75 %). Radiographically enlarged lymph nodes were not associated with true lymph node metastases in PDAs (70 % lymph node positive cases were enlarged on CT vs 74 % lymph node negative, p = 0.5), but were associated with a preoperatively placed biliary endoprosthesis (63 % with endoprosthesis were enlarged vs 37 % no endoprosthesis, p = 0.013). Major visceral vessel involvement on CT was not associated with a vascular resection (3 % with CT vessel involvement vs 2 % without, p = 0.8) or a positive uncinate resection margin (24 vs 20 %, respectively, p = 0.6).
While dedicated pancreas protocol CT provides unprecedented detail, the test may lead to overinterpretation of the extent of disease in some instances. A radiographic suggestion of enlarged lymph nodes and vascular involvement does not necessarily preclude exploration with curative intent. CTs with local disease should be reported in an objective template and carefully reviewed by a multidisciplinary group of surgeons, radiologists, and oncologists to avoid missing an opportunity for neoadjuvant therapy or cure by resection.
KeywordsPeriampullary cancers Computed tomography Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
- 9.House MG, Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Campbell KA, Schulick RD, Leach SD, et al. Predicting resectability of periampullary cancer with three-dimensional computed tomography. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2004;8(3):280–8. Epub 2004/03/17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Zhao WY, Luo M, Sun YW, Xu Q, Chen W, Zhao G, et al. Computed tomography in diagnosing vascular invasion in pancreatic and periampullary cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatobiliary & pancreatic diseases international : HBPD INT. 2009;8(5):457–64. Epub 2009/10/14.Google Scholar
- 17.Luttges J, Vogel I, Menke M, Henne-Bruns D, Kremer B, Kloppel G. The retroperitoneal resection margin and vessel involvement are important factors determining survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas. Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology. 1998;433(3):237–42. Epub 1998/10/13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Lavu H, Mascaro AA, Grenda DR, Sauter PK, Leiby BE, Croker SP, et al. Margin positive pancreaticoduodenectomy is superior to palliative bypass in locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2009;13(11):1937–46; discussion 46–7. Epub 2009/09/18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Winter JM, Cameron JL, Campbell KA, Arnold MA, Chang DC, Coleman J, et al. 1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: A single-institution experience. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2006;10(9):1199–210; discussion 210–1. Epub 2006/11/23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.O’Malley ME, Boland GW, Wood BJ, Fernandez-del Castillo C, Warshaw AL, Mueller PR. Adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: determination of surgical unresectability with thin-section pancreatic-phase helical CT. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 1999;173(6):1513–8. Epub 1999/12/10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Midwinter MJ, Beveridge CJ, Wilsdon JB, Bennett MK, Baudouin CJ, Charnley RM. Correlation between spiral computed tomography, endoscopic ultrasonography and findings at operation in pancreatic and ampullary tumours. The British journal of surgery. 1999;86(2):189–93. Epub 1999/04/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Palazzo L, Roseau G, Gayet B, Vilgrain V, Belghiti J, Fekete F, et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Results of a prospective study with comparison to ultrasonography and CT scan. Endoscopy. 1993;25(2):143–50. Epub 1993/02/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Rosch T, Braig C, Gain T, Feuerbach S, Siewert JR, Schusdziarra V, et al. Staging of pancreatic and ampullary carcinoma by endoscopic ultrasonography. Comparison with conventional sonography, computed tomography, and angiography. Gastroenterology. 1992;102(1):188–99. Epub 1992/01/01.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.Tsai S, Choti MA, Assumpcao L, Cameron JL, Gleisner AL, Herman JM, et al. Impact of obesity on perioperative outcomes and survival following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: a large single-institution study. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2010;14(7):1143–50. Epub 2010/05/01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.Katz MH, Merchant NB, Brower S, Branda M, Posner MC, William Traverso L, et al. Standardization of surgical and pathologic variables is needed in multicenter trials of adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: results from the ACOSOG Z5031 trial. Annals of surgical oncology. 2011;18(2):337–44. Epub 2010/09/03.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar