Morphological analysis of pancreatic cystic masses.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to analyze the morphology of pancreatic cystic masses detected on multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT) to determine whether single-dimension measurements of these masses are accurate reflections of their volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty-five pancreatic cystic masses detected on MDCT in 25 patients were evaluated. Pancreatic cysts were segmented on MDCT using commercially available software. All measurements were obtained twice by two independent investigators, and the means of values for segmented cyst volume (Vs) (milliliters), maximum transaxial diameter (millimeters), and elongation value (defined as 1 - [width/length], where 1 = ellipsoid and 0 = spherical) were reported for each cystic lesion. The volume of each cyst was also calculated (Vc) using the maximum transaxial diameter, with the hypothesis that the cyst was spherical. Student's t test was used to analyze the differences between values of Vs and Vc. Bland-Altman plots and Lin's concordance correlation were used to assess agreement between different measurement techniques. A P value < .05 denoted statistical significance. Interobserver variability was also determined using the Bland-Altman method. RESULTS There was a significant difference between Vs and Vc (P < .0001). The elongation values ranged from 0.28 to 0.83 (mean, 0.57 +/- 0.12; median, 0.56). Mean interobserver variability was 1.7% (95% confidence interval, -4.89% to 8.30%). CONCLUSIONS The results suggest that pancreatic cystic masses are not spherical. Therefore, a cyst's single largest transaxial dimension is not an accurate surrogate of its actual volume.

[1]  D. Sahani,et al.  Pancreatic cysts 3 cm or smaller. , 2007, Radiology.

[2]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[3]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[4]  L. Lin,et al.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. , 1989, Biometrics.

[5]  M. Gonen,et al.  A Selective Approach to the Resection of Cystic Lesions of the Pancreas: Results From 539 Consecutive Patients , 2006, Annals of surgery.

[6]  B. Petersen,et al.  Study of recurrence after surgical resection of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the pancreas. , 2002, Gastroenterology.

[7]  Michelle A. Anderson,et al.  Risk of Malignancy in Resected Cystic Tumors of the Pancreas ≤3 cm in Size: Is it Safe to Observe Asymptomatic Patients? A Multi-institutional Report , 2008, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[8]  A. Levy.  Prevalence of Unsuspected Pancreatic Cysts on MDCT , 2009 .

[9]  G Garcea,et al.  Cystic Lesions of the Pancreas , 2008, Pancreatology.

[10]  Michael Sühling,et al.  Semi-automated measurement of hyperdense, hypodense and heterogeneous hepatic metastasis on standard MDCT slices. Comparison of semi-automated and manual measurement of RECIST and WHO criteria , 2008, European Radiology.

[11]  Noriyuki Tomiyama,et al.  Computer-assisted lung nodule volumetry from multi-detector row CT: influence of image reconstruction parameters. , 2007, European journal of radiology.

[12]  R. Walsh,et al.  Management of suspected pancreatic cystic neoplasms based on cyst size. , 2008, Surgery.

[13]  H. Pitt,et al.  Cystic Pancreatic Neoplasms: Observe or Operate , 2004, Annals of surgery.

[14]  S. Chari,et al.  International Consensus Guidelines for Management of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms and Mucinous Cystic Neoplasms of the Pancreas , 2006, Pancreatology.

[15]  D. Sahani,et al.  Pancreatic cysts 3 cm or smaller: how aggressive should treatment be? , 2006, Radiology.