AIM: Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) is an uncommon pancreatic tumour characterised by solid and pseudopapillary growth patterns. We have observed SPNs can show a microcystic pattern (microcystic SPN), which has been poorly described and may be confused with microcystic neoplasms. We conducted the present study to clarify the clinicopathological and immunohistochemical features of microcystic SPNs. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined a consecutive series of 44 SPNs and 10 serous cystadenomas (SCAs), and classified them into 13 microcystic SPNs (29.5%) and 31 conventional SPNs (70.5%). Clinicopathological analysis, immunohistochemical staining and mucin histochemistry were performed. Clear cell change, hyalinised stroma and haemorrhage were observed significantly more frequently in the microcystic SPNs compared to the conventional SPNs. Immunohistochemically, the microcystic SPNs showed significantly lower frequencies of CD10 (0%) and CD56 expression (62%) compared to the conventional SPNs (87%; P < 0.001, 90%; P < 0.0085, respectively). There were no significant differences in other clinicopathological and immunohistochemical features between the two groups (i.e. the nuclear expression of β-catenin, E-cadherin, progesterone receptor (PgR), lack of forkhead box (Fox)L2 and occasional oestrogen receptor (ER), AE1/AE3 expression). Microcystic SCAs lack such a characteristic immunophenotype. The myxoid stroma of microcystic SPNs contained hyaluronan revealed by Alcian blue stain with hyaluronidase digestion. CONCLUSION: We thus conclude that the microcystic pattern should be recognised as a part of the morphological spectrum of SPNs. Our findings may contribute to the correct diagnosis of the pancreatic neoplasms with the microcystic pattern. In addition, we speculate that stromal change caused by an accumulation of hyaluronan may contribute to the microcystic pattern of SPN.
AIM: Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) is an uncommon pancreatic tumour characterised by solid and pseudopapillary growth patterns. We have observed SPNs can show a microcystic pattern (microcystic SPN), which has been poorly described and may be confused with microcystic neoplasms. We conducted the present study to clarify the clinicopathological and immunohistochemical features of microcystic SPNs. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined a consecutive series of 44 SPNs and 10 serous cystadenomas (SCAs), and classified them into 13 microcystic SPNs (29.5%) and 31 conventional SPNs (70.5%). Clinicopathological analysis, immunohistochemical staining and mucin histochemistry were performed. Clear cell change, hyalinised stroma and haemorrhage were observed significantly more frequently in the microcystic SPNs compared to the conventional SPNs. Immunohistochemically, the microcystic SPNs showed significantly lower frequencies of CD10 (0%) and CD56 expression (62%) compared to the conventional SPNs (87%; P < 0.001, 90%; P < 0.0085, respectively). There were no significant differences in other clinicopathological and immunohistochemical features between the two groups (i.e. the nuclear expression of β-catenin, E-cadherin, progesterone receptor (PgR), lack of forkhead box (Fox)L2 and occasional oestrogen receptor (ER), AE1/AE3 expression). Microcystic SCAs lack such a characteristic immunophenotype. The myxoid stroma of microcystic SPNs contained hyaluronan revealed by Alcian blue stain with hyaluronidase digestion. CONCLUSION: We thus conclude that the microcystic pattern should be recognised as a part of the morphological spectrum of SPNs. Our findings may contribute to the correct diagnosis of the pancreatic neoplasms with the microcystic pattern. In addition, we speculate that stromal change caused by an accumulation of hyaluronan may contribute to the microcystic pattern of SPN.