Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

CT arterial portography in the staging of pancreatic malignancy

  • Published:
International Journal of Pancreatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Background. Detection of metastatic liver disease and malignant involvement of major peripancreatic vessels is important to determine resectability of pacreatic malignancy. Computed tomography with arterial portography (CTAP) is the most sensitive method for detection of colorectal liver metastases; it can also detect malignant vascular involvement. We have assessed CTAP in patients with pancreatic cancer considered suitable for resection after standard ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) examination.

Method. CTAP was performed in 18 patients (8 with a biliary stent). All patients had previous US and CT with no clear evidence of irresectability. Findings of CTAP were compared with the prior CT and with findings at operation or clinical progress.

Results. CTAP suggested liver metastases in 7 patients. Three were confirmed at operation or at follow-up (sensitivity for detection of metastases in CT negative patients of 75%). There were 4 false-positive assessments (specificity, 71%). One further patient developed liver metastases within 6 mo after resection (1 false-negative). Nine patients had vascular involvement at operation. There was 1 false-positive and one false-negative assessment (sensitivity, 89% and specificity, 89%). CTAP detected vascular involvement in 4 patients in whom it was not detected by CT.

Conclusion. This preliminary study suggests that CTAP is a sensitive test for detection of liver metastases and vascular involvement in patients with pancreatic malignancy. This invasive test should be reserved for patients who are considered operable on the basis of other preoperative tests.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cutler SJ, Myers MH, White PL. Who are we missing and why? CA 1976; 37: 421–435.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Trede M. The surgical treatment of pancreatic carcinoma. Surgery 1985; 97: 28–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Michelassi F, Erroi F, Dawson PJ, et al. Experience with 647 consecutive tumours of the duodenum, ampulla, head of the pancreas and distal common bile duct. Ann Surg 1989; 210: 544–546.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cubilla AL, Fitzgerald PJ, Fortner JG. Pancreas cancerduct cell adenocarcinoma: survival in relation to site, size, stage and type of therapy. J Surg Oncol 1978; 10: 465–482.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sheth N, Dalbagni G, Rothenberg RE, et al. Carcinoma of the pancreas in non jaundiced patients: a silent disease. Ann Surg 1985; 51: 252–255.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jafri SZH, Alsen AM, Glazer GM, Weiss CA. Comparison of CT and angiography in assessing resectability of pancreatic carcinoma. Am J Radiol 1984; 142: 525–529.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Makie CR, Lu CT, Noble HG, et al. Prospective evaluation of angiography in the diagnosis and management of patients suspected of having pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 1979; 189: 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Freeny PC, Marks WH, Ryan JA, Traverso LW. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: diagnosis and staging with dynamic CT. Radiology 1988; 166: 125–133.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Chezmar JL, Nelson RC, Small WC, Bernardino ME. Magnetic resonance imaging of the pancreas with gadolinium DTPA. Gastrointest Radio 1991; 16: 139–142.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brambs HJ, Claussen CD. Pancreatic and ampullary carcinoma. Ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and angiography. Endosc 1993; 25: 58–68.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Warshaw AL, Gu ZY, Wittenberg J, Waltman AC. Preoperative staging and assessment of resectability of pancreatic cancer. Arch Surg 1990; 125: 130–133.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Warshaw AL, Tepper JE, Shipley WU. Laparoscopy in the staging and planning of therapy for pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg 1986; 151: 76–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fuhrman GM, Charnsangavej C, Abbruzzese JL, et al. Thin section contrast enhanced computed tomography accurately predicts the resectability of malignant pancreatic neoplasm. Am J Surg 1994; 157(1): 104–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Coley SC, Strickland NH, Walker JD, Williamson RCN. Spiral CT and the preoperative assessment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Clin Radiol 1997; 52: 24–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rong GH, Sindelar WF. Aberrant peripancreatic arterial anatomy: considerations in performing pancreatectomy for malignant neoplasm. Am Surg 1987; 53: 726–729.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Soyer P, Lacheheb D, Belkacem A, Levesque M. Involvement of superior mesenteric vessels and portal vein in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: detection with CT during arterial portography. Abdo Imag 1994; 19(5): 413–416.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nelson RC, Chezmar JL, Sugarbaker PH, Bernardino ME. Hepatic tumours: comparison of CT during arterial portography, delayed CT and MR imaging for preoperative evaluation. Radiology 1989; 172: 24–34.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Matsui O, Takashima T, Kadoya M, et al. Liver metastases from colorectal cancers: detection with CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1987; 165: 65–69.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Heiken JP, Weyman PJ, Lee JKT, et al. Detection of focal hepatic masses: prospective evaluation with CT, delayed CT, CT during arterial portography and MR imaging. Radiology 1989; 171: 47–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nelson RC, Chezmar JL, Sugarbaker PH, Murray DR, Bernardino ME. Preoperative localisation of focal liver lesions to specific liver segment: utility of CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1990; 176: 89–94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Redvanly RD, Chezmar JL. CT arterial portography: technique, indications and applications. Clin Radiol 1997; 52: 256–268.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Soyer P, Levesque M, Elias D, Zeitoun G, Roche A. Preoperative assessment of resectability of hepatic metastases from colonic carcinoma: CT portography vs. sonography and dynamic CT. Am J Roentgenol 1992; 159: 741–744.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Moran BJ, O’Rourke N, Plant GR, Rees M. Computed tomographic portography in preoperative imaging of hepatic neoplasms. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 669–671.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Savader BL, Fishman EK, Savader SJ, Cameron JL. CT arterial portography vs. pancreatic arteriography in the assessment of vascular involvement in pancreatic and periampullary tumours. J Comp Assist Tomogr 1994; 18(6): 916–920.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Steves MA, Vidal-Jove J, Sugarbaker PH, et al. Preoperative radiological evaluation of the liver by computerised tomographic portography in patients with hepatic tumours. Am Surg 1992; 58: 608–612.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Soyer P, Levesque M, Elias D, Zeitoun G, Roche A. Detection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: comparison of intraoperative US and CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1992; 183: 541–544.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Soyer P, Bluemke DA, Hruban RH, Sitzmann JV, Fishman EK. Hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: detection and false positive findings with helical CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1994; 193: 71–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Soyer P, Lacheheb D, Levesque M. False positive CT portography: correlation with pathologic findings. Am J Roentgenol 1993; 160: 285–289.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Nelson RC, Thompson GH, Chezmar JL, Harned II RK, Fernandez MDP. CT during arterial portography diagnostic pitfalls. Radiographics 1992; 12: 705–718.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Paulson EK, Baker ME, Hilleren DJ, et al. CT arterial portography: causes of failure and variable liver enhancement. AJR 1992; 159: 745–749.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Ward BA, Miller DL, Frank JA, et al. Prospective evaluation of hepatic imaging studies in the detection of colorectal metastases: correlation with surgical findings. Surgery 1989; 105: 180–187.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Young N, Sing T, Wong KP, Holland M, Tait. Use of spiral and non-spiral computed tomography arterial photography in the detection of potentially malignant liver masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1997; 12(5): 385–391.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University Surgical Unit, F-level, Centre Block, Southampton General Hospital, SO 16 O YD, Southampton, UK

    Subodh Varshney, C. N. Hacking & C. D. Johnson

Authors
  1. Subodh Varshney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. N. Hacking
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. D. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Subodh Varshney.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Varshney, S., Hacking, C.N. & Johnson, C.D. CT arterial portography in the staging of pancreatic malignancy. International Journal of Pancreatology 28, 59–65 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1385/IJGC:28:1:59

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/IJGC:28:1:59

Key Words

Search

Navigation