We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms and the Risk of Diabetes Mellitus in Patients Undergoing Resection Versus Observation.
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2015 November
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the pancreas (IPMN) and compare rates of new/progressive DM between IPMN patients undergoing pancreatectomy versus observation.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with IPMN were identified from institutional databases, divided into two groups based on treatment type, pancreatectomy versus clinical observation, and subsequently evaluated. Standard demographic and clinicopathologic variables, fasting glucose, diabetic status, and pancreatic volume data, were obtained and compared between groups.
RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four IPMN patients were identified; 103 (77 %) underwent pancreatectomy and 31 (23 %) were observed. Baseline DM rate was 18 % (24/134). This was not different between groups [17 % (17/103) resected vs. 23 % (7/31) observed, p = 0.51]. Median follow-up was 53 months and new/progressive DM occurred in 37 (28 %) patients with no difference between groups [29 (28 %) resected vs. 8 (26 %) observed, p = 0.74]. Among resected patients, degree of dysplasia was associated with increase risk of new/progressive DM [moderate dysplasia OR 5.76 (1.24-26.79) and severe dysplasia OR 9.43 (1.54-57.74), p = 0.04], while procedure type and remnant volume were not.
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and prevalence of DM among patients with IPMN was high and did not differ between resected and observed groups. Degree of dysplasia, not the amount of resected pancreas, was associated with increased risk of DM, suggesting that the presence or development of DM may be a marker of malignant progression. Confirmatory studies are required.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with IPMN were identified from institutional databases, divided into two groups based on treatment type, pancreatectomy versus clinical observation, and subsequently evaluated. Standard demographic and clinicopathologic variables, fasting glucose, diabetic status, and pancreatic volume data, were obtained and compared between groups.
RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four IPMN patients were identified; 103 (77 %) underwent pancreatectomy and 31 (23 %) were observed. Baseline DM rate was 18 % (24/134). This was not different between groups [17 % (17/103) resected vs. 23 % (7/31) observed, p = 0.51]. Median follow-up was 53 months and new/progressive DM occurred in 37 (28 %) patients with no difference between groups [29 (28 %) resected vs. 8 (26 %) observed, p = 0.74]. Among resected patients, degree of dysplasia was associated with increase risk of new/progressive DM [moderate dysplasia OR 5.76 (1.24-26.79) and severe dysplasia OR 9.43 (1.54-57.74), p = 0.04], while procedure type and remnant volume were not.
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and prevalence of DM among patients with IPMN was high and did not differ between resected and observed groups. Degree of dysplasia, not the amount of resected pancreas, was associated with increased risk of DM, suggesting that the presence or development of DM may be a marker of malignant progression. Confirmatory studies are required.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
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
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