| Literature DB >> 35453888 |
Bozhidar Hristov1,2, Vladimir Andonov1,2, Daniel Doykov1,2, Silvia Tsvetkova3, Katya Doykova3,4, Mladen Doykov5,6.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A variety of imaging techniques exists for the diagnosis of pancreatic disorders. None of the broadly applied diagnostic methods utilizes elasticity as an indicator of tissue damage. A well-known fact is that both chronic pancreatitis (CP) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) are associated with the development of prominent fibrosis (increased tissue stiffness).Entities:
Keywords: elastography; pSWE; pancreatic carcinoma; pancreatitis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35453888 PMCID: PMC9029164 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12040841
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) ISSN: 2075-4418
Existing imaging techniques for the diagnosis of pancreatic disorders.
| Imaging Modality | Chronic Pancreatitis | Pancreatic Cancer | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | |
| Computer tomography (CT) | 75% | 91% | 91–95% | 100% |
| Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) | 70–80% | 80–10% | 70% | 94% |
| Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) | 88% | 98% | 84–91% | 97% |
| Ultrasonography (US) | 60–81% | 70–97% | 76% | 75% |
| Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) | 80–100% | 80–100% | 98% | 95.8% |
Cambridge classification of CP adapted for CT.
| Cambridge 0 (Normal Pancreas) | Normal Pancreatic Parenchyma |
|---|---|
| Cambridge 1 (Uncertain) | It is impossible to exclude or confirm the diagnosis of pancreatitis based on CT |
| Cambridge 2 (Mild pancreatitis) | Two or more of the following: Main pancreatic duct (MPD) between 2–4 mm measured in the body, mild enlargement of the gland, heterogenic structure of the parenchyma, small cystic lesions (<10 mm), irregular ductal contour, more than three pathologically dilated side branches |
| Cambridge 3 (Moderate pancreatitis) | Same as 2 + MPD > 4 mm |
| Cambridge 4 (Severe pancreatitis) | Same as 2 and 3 + one of the following: cystic lesion >10 mm, parenchymal calcifications, ductal calcifications, ductal strictures, deformations of MPD |
SWV values in the CP group.
| Results | SWV | SWV | SWV |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.85 | 1.76 | 1.63 |
| ⚬ Standard deviation | 0.49 | 0.46 | 0.34 |
|
| |||
| ⚬ Lower limit (m/s) | 1.03 | 1.11 | 0.88 |
| ⚬ Upper limit (m/s) | 2.98 | 2.99 | 2.31 |
SWV values in the CP group (entire parenchyma).
| Descriptive Statistics | SWV Entire Parenchyma (m/s) |
|---|---|
| ⚬ Lowest value | 1.13 |
| ⚬ Highest value | 2.81 |
|
| 1.75 |
| ⚬ Median | 1.73 |
| ⚬ Standard deviation | 0.34 |
|
| |
| ⚬ Lower limit (m/s) | 0.99 |
| ⚬ Upper limit (m/s) | 2.43 |
Figure 1Association between depth of ROI and SWV in CP patients. *—significant association (p < 0.05); **—significant association (p < 0.01); rs—Spearman rank-order correlation (negative values re-flect inverse correlation).
Figure 2Association between BMI and SWV in CP patients.
SWV values in the PDA group.
| SWV Tumor (m/s) | Total | Male | Female | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | 0.009 ** | |||
| 2.92 ± 0.91 | 2.55 ± 0.72 | 3.30 ± 0.95 | ||
| Min.–Max. | ||||
| 0.88–4.65 | 1.14–4.20 | 0.88–4.65 | ||
| Lower limit (m/s) | 1.01 | 0.96 | 1.36 | |
| Upper limit (m/s) | 4.85 | 4.10 | 5.51 |
Mean ± SD value for the tumor SWV irrespective of sex was established at 2.92 ± 0.9 m/s with reference values of 1.01 m/s to 4.85 m/s. **—significant association (p < 0.01).
Figure 3SWV values in correlation with obstructive jaundice.
Figure 4Performance of pSWE for differentiating between CP and PDA.
Accuracy, Se, and Sp of pSWE for differentiating between CP and PDA.
| PDA→CP | AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity | Cut-Off | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 0.796 to 0.976 | <0.001 | 75.20 to 91.10 | 76.90 to 98.20 |
|