6533b7dcfe1ef96bd1272c86

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Imaging features of pancreatic metastases: A comparison with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Massimo GaliaDomenico AlbanoDario PiconeMaria Chiara TerranovaAntonino AgrusaGiuseppe Di BuonoAnna LicataGiuseppe Lo ReLudovico La GruttaMassimo MidiriGiuseppe Lo Re

subject

Malemedicine.medical_specialtyRadiology Nuclear Medicine and ImagingPancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaLung Neoplasmsendocrine system diseasesMetastaseComputed tomographyAdenocarcinoma030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicinemedicineHumansAbdominal radiology; Adenocarcinoma; Computed tomography; Magnetic resonance; Metastases; Pancreas; Radiology Nuclear Medicine and ImagingPancreaPancreatic carcinomaCarcinoma Renal CellComputed tomographyAgedRetrospective StudiesAged 80 and overmedicine.diagnostic_testbusiness.industrySignificant differenceMagnetic resonance imagingNeoplasms Second PrimaryMiddle Agedmedicine.diseaseMagnetic Resonance ImagingAbdominal radiologydigestive system diseasesKidney NeoplasmsPancreatic Neoplasmsmedicine.anatomical_structureMagnetic resonance030220 oncology & carcinogenesisAdenocarcinomaFemaleRadiologybusinessPancreasTomography X-Ray ComputedCarcinoma Pancreatic Ductal

description

Purpose: To compare imaging features of pancreatic metastases (PM) with those of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC). Methods: CT and MR scans of 24 patients with 54 PM and 30 patients with PDAC were reviewed to evaluate the imaging features, which were compared by using a Chi square test. Results: We found a statistically significant difference between PM and PDAC based on location (P < 0.001), margins (P < 0.001), arterial enhancement (P = 0.004), rim enhancement (P < 0.001), pancreatic duct dilatation (P = 0.01), common bile duct dilatation (P = 0.003), vascular involvement (P = 0.02), parenchymal atrophy (P < 0.001), peripancreatic fluid (P = 0.03). Conclusion: Imaging features might be helpful to differentiate PM from PDAC.

yearjournalcountryeditionlanguage
2018-01-01
10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.01.016http://hdl.handle.net/10447/276907