OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) are fairly uncommon. Recent data highlight the importance of EUS in diagnosis of PNET. With this background, we decided to review our experience from a tertiary cancer center with regard to the presentation and clinical features of PNET and the diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA in this scenario. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent EUS at our institution between January 1st 2001 and December 31st 2009 for a suspected PNET. Data on clinical features, cross-sectional imaging findings, EUS findings, and cytology results were collected. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were referred for EUS-FNA for a suspected PNET. Mean age was 58.1 years. There were 41 (50.6%) males. PNET was found incidentally in 38 (46.9%) patients. Computed tomography scanning identified a pancreatic mass in 72 out of 79 (91.1%) cases. Mean diameter of the largest lesion seen on EUS was 27.5 mm (range: 6.9-80 mm). The most common site (34; 42%) was the head of the pancreas. EUS-FNA correctly confirmed a PNET in 73 out of 81 cases with diagnostic accuracy of 90.1%. Seven (8.6%) out of 81 patients had functional lesions, including three gastrinomas and four insulinomas. Liver metastases were found in 31 out of 81 (38.3%) cases. Of the 31 patients with liver metastasis, the mean diameter of lesions on EUS was 33.9 mm compared with 23.5 mm in patients without liver metastasis (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: EUS-FNA is a reliable modality for further characterization of suspected lesions and for establishing a tissue diagnosis. The occurrence of complications of EUS-FNA in this setting is low. Non-functional PNET are more frequently encountered than functional PNET.
OBJECTIVES:Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) are fairly uncommon. Recent data highlight the importance of EUS in diagnosis of PNET. With this background, we decided to review our experience from a tertiary cancer center with regard to the presentation and clinical features of PNET and the diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA in this scenario. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent EUS at our institution between January 1st 2001 and December 31st 2009 for a suspected PNET. Data on clinical features, cross-sectional imaging findings, EUS findings, and cytology results were collected. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were referred for EUS-FNA for a suspected PNET. Mean age was 58.1 years. There were 41 (50.6%) males. PNET was found incidentally in 38 (46.9%) patients. Computed tomography scanning identified a pancreatic mass in 72 out of 79 (91.1%) cases. Mean diameter of the largest lesion seen on EUS was 27.5 mm (range: 6.9-80 mm). The most common site (34; 42%) was the head of the pancreas. EUS-FNA correctly confirmed a PNET in 73 out of 81 cases with diagnostic accuracy of 90.1%. Seven (8.6%) out of 81 patients had functional lesions, including three gastrinomas and four insulinomas. Liver metastases were found in 31 out of 81 (38.3%) cases. Of the 31 patients with liver metastasis, the mean diameter of lesions on EUS was 33.9 mm compared with 23.5 mm in patients without liver metastasis (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: EUS-FNA is a reliable modality for further characterization of suspected lesions and for establishing a tissue diagnosis. The occurrence of complications of EUS-FNA in this setting is low. Non-functional PNET are more frequently encountered than functional PNET.
Authors: Lyndon V Hernandez; Girish Mishra; Christopher Forsmark; Peter V Draganov; John M Petersen; Steven N Hochwald; Stephen B Vogel; Manoop S Bhutani Journal: Pancreas Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Eva-Maria Duerr; Yusuke Mizukami; Aylwin Ng; Ramnik J Xavier; Hirotoshi Kikuchi; Vikram Deshpande; Andrew L Warshaw; Jonathan Glickman; Matthew H Kulke; Daniel C Chung Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 5.678
Authors: Rosalie A Carr; Michele T Yip-Schneider; Scott Dolejs; Bradley A Hancock; Huangbing Wu; Milan Radovich; C Max Schmidt Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Satomi Kawamoto; Pamela T Johnson; Chanjuan Shi; Aatur D Singhi; Ralph H Hruban; Christopher L Wolfgang; Barish H Edil; Elliot K Fishman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Peter Herbert Kann; Roland Moll; Detlef Bartsch; Andreas Pfützner; Thomas Forst; Gianluca Tamagno; Joachim N Goebel; Verena Fourkiotis; Simona Raluca Bergmann; Maike Collienne Journal: Endocrine Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 3.633