BACKGROUND: Mass-forming focal pancreatitis (FP) may mimic pancreatic cancer (PC) on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and the preoperative differential diagnosis is often difficult. Recently, the usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer has been reported in several studies. PURPOSE: To investigate if apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements based on diffusion-weighted echo-planar imaging (DW-EPI) may distinguish between normal pancreas parenchyma, mass-forming focal pancreatitis, and pancreas carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: MRI was performed on 64 patients: 24 with pancreas carcinoma (PC), 20 with mass-forming focal pancreatitis (FP), three patients with other focal pancreatic disease as well as 17 controls without any known pancreatic disease. Diffusion-weighted sequence with ADC maps and T2-weighted sequence for anatomical information was performed. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps were automatically created and analyzed using a dedicated user interface. In the group with pancreas disease the abnormal parenchyma was detected by using T1- and T2-weighted images and the region of interest (ROI) was transferred exactly to the ADC map and the coefficients were registered. In the control group the ROI was set to the head of the pancreas followed by a similar registration of the ADCs. RESULTS: ADC values for mass-forming FP and PC differed significantly from ADC values for normal pancreas parenchyma (P = 0.001/P = 0.002). Mean ADC values for mass-forming FP were 0.69 ± 0.18 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s. ADC values for PC were 0.78 ± 0.11 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, compared to ADC values of 0.17 ± 0.06 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s in the control group. However there was no significant difference in ADCs between PC and mass-forming FP (P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: ADC measurements clearly differentiated between normal pancreatic tissue and abnormal pancreas parenchyma (PC and mass-forming FP). However there is an overlap in values of PC and mass-forming FP, with the consequent problem of their correct identification.
BACKGROUND: Mass-forming focal pancreatitis (FP) may mimic pancreatic cancer (PC) on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and the preoperative differential diagnosis is often difficult. Recently, the usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer has been reported in several studies. PURPOSE: To investigate if apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements based on diffusion-weighted echo-planar imaging (DW-EPI) may distinguish between normal pancreas parenchyma, mass-forming focal pancreatitis, and pancreas carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: MRI was performed on 64 patients: 24 with pancreas carcinoma (PC), 20 with mass-forming focal pancreatitis (FP), three patients with other focal pancreatic disease as well as 17 controls without any known pancreatic disease. Diffusion-weighted sequence with ADC maps and T2-weighted sequence for anatomical information was performed. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps were automatically created and analyzed using a dedicated user interface. In the group with pancreas disease the abnormal parenchyma was detected by using T1- and T2-weighted images and the region of interest (ROI) was transferred exactly to the ADC map and the coefficients were registered. In the control group the ROI was set to the head of the pancreas followed by a similar registration of the ADCs. RESULTS: ADC values for mass-forming FP and PC differed significantly from ADC values for normal pancreas parenchyma (P = 0.001/P = 0.002). Mean ADC values for mass-forming FP were 0.69 ± 0.18 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s. ADC values for PC were 0.78 ± 0.11 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, compared to ADC values of 0.17 ± 0.06 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s in the control group. However there was no significant difference in ADCs between PC and mass-forming FP (P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: ADC measurements clearly differentiated between normal pancreatic tissue and abnormal pancreas parenchyma (PC and mass-forming FP). However there is an overlap in values of PC and mass-forming FP, with the consequent problem of their correct identification.
Authors: Riccardo De Robertis; Paolo Tinazzi Martini; Emanuele Demozzi; Flavia Dal Corso; Claudio Bassi; Paolo Pederzoli; Mirko D'Onofrio Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2015-10-28
Authors: William A Moore; Gaurav Khatri; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; Robert D Sims; Ivan Pedrosa Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Jana Taron; Petros Martirosian; Thomas Kuestner; Nina F Schwenzer; Ahmed Othman; Jakob Weiß; Mike Notohamiprodjo; Konstantin Nikolaou; Christina Schraml Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 5.315