EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: does cyst size change the tip of the scale? A critical analysis of the revised international consensus guidelines in a large single-institutional series.

Annals of Surgery 2013 September
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to critically analyze the safety of the revised guidelines, with focus on cyst size and worrisome features in the management of BD-IPMN.

BACKGROUND: The Sendai guidelines for management of branch duct (BD) intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) espouse safety of observation of asymptomatic cysts smaller than 3 cm without nodules (Sendai negative). Revised international consensus guidelines published in 2012 suggest a still more conservative approach, even for lesions of 3 cm or larger. By contrast, 2 recent studies have challenged the safety of both guidelines, describing invasive carcinoma or carcinoma in situ in 67% of BD-IPMN smaller than 3 cm and in 25% of "Sendai-negative" BD-IPMN.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Review of a prospective database identified 563 patients with BD-IPMN. A total of 240 patients underwent surgical resection (152 at the time of diagnosis and 88 after being initially followed); the remaining 323 have been managed by observation with median follow-up of 60 months. No patient developed unresectable BD-IPMN carcinoma during follow-up. Invasive cancer arising in BD-IPMN was found in 23 patients of the entire cohort (4%), and an additional 21 patients (3.7%) had or developed concurrent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. According to the revised guidelines, 76% of resected BD-IPMN with carcinoma in situ and 95% of resected BD-IPMN with invasive cancer had high-risk stigmata or worrisome features. The risk of high-grade dysplasia in nonworrisome lesions smaller than 3 cm was 6.5%, but when the threshold was raised to greater than 3 cm, it was 8.8%, and 1 case of invasive carcinoma was found.

CONCLUSIONS: Expectant management of BD-IPMN following the old guidelines is safe, whereas caution is advised for larger lesions, even in the absence of worrisome features.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app