Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1027885
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Kontrastverstärkte Endosonographie zur Verbesserung der Differenzialdiagnose zwischen chronischer Pankreatitis und Pankreaskarzinom
Contrast enhanced endosonography for improving differential diagnosis between chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancerPublication History
eingereicht: 3.4.2008
angenommen: 21.8.2008
Publication Date:
23 October 2008 (online)

Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund und Fragestellung: Ziel der Studie war es zu klären, ob mit der kontrastverstärkten Endosonographie die Differenzialdiagnose zwischen fokal chronischer Pankreatitis und duktalem Pankreaskarzinom verbessert werden kann.
Patienten und Methodik: Über 6 Jahre wurden 194 Patienten (75 Frauen, 119 Männer; mittleres Alter 64 ± 11 Jahre) mit chronischer Pankreatitis (n = 73) oder Pankreaskarzinom (n = 121) eingeschlossen. Die Untersuchungen wurden mit einem longitudinalen Endosonographiegerät im Farbdopplermodus nach Gabe von 4,8 ml Ultraschall-Kontrastmittel durchgeführt. Kriterien für ein Karzinom waren: 1. spärliche Vaskularisation, 2. irreguläre Gefäßversorgung, 3. nur arterielle Gefäße nach Kontrastmittelgabe nachweisbar. Kriterien für eine fokale chronische Pankreatitis waren: 1. reichliche Vaskularisation, 2. reguläre Gefäßanordnung, 3. arterielle und venöse Gefäße in der Zielläsion nach Kontrastmittelgabe nachweisbar. Goldstandard war die histologische Diagnose durch Feinnadelpunktion oder Operation.
Ergebnis: Die Endosonographie ohne Kontrastmittel war in 96 von 121 Fällen mit Pankreaskarzinom (Sensitivität 79,3 ; 95 %-Konfidenzintervall 71 – 86,2 ) und in 60 von 73 mit chronischer Pankreatitis (Spezifität 82,2 [71,5 – 90,2 ]) richtig. Nach Wertung der Kontrastmittelkriterien konnte die Diagnose in 111 von 121 Patienten mit Pankreaskarzinom (Sensitivität 91,7 [85,3 – 96 ]) und 70 von 73 Patienten mit chronischer Pankreatitis (Spezifität 95,9 [88,5 – 99,1 ]) korrekt gestellt werden.
Folgerung: Die kontrastmittelverstärkte Endosonographie zur Mikrogefäßanalyse stellt eine wertvolle Bereicherung der diagnostischen Möglichkeiten zur Differenzialdiagnose zwischen chronischer fokaler Pankreatitis und Pankreaskarzinom dar.
Contrast enhanced endosonography for improving differential diagnosis between chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer
Background and objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate contrast-enhanced endosonography as a method for improving the differentiation between chronic focal pancreatitis and ductal pancreatic cancer, based on perfusion characteristics of the microcirculation.
Patients and method: In 194 patients [75 women, 119 men; age: 64 ± 11 years] with chronic pancreatitis (n = 73) or pancreatic cancer (n = 121), pancreatic lesions were examined by conventional endoscopic B-mode ultrasound, power Doppler ultrasound and contrast-enhanced power mode, using the following criteria for malignant lesions: no detectable vascularization with conventional power Doppler scanning, irregular appearance of arterial vessels over a short distance using contrast-enhanced technique and no detection of venous vessels inside the lesion. A malignant lesion was assumed to be present if all criteria were detectable. The criteria of chronic pancreatitis without neoplasia were defined as no detectable vascularization before injection, regular appearance of vessels over a distance of at least 20 mm after injection of the contrast medium and detection of arterial and venous vessels. The gold standard was the histological diagnosis by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration cytology or operation.
Results: Using conventional EUS the diagnosis was correct in 96 of 121 patients with pancreatic cancer (sensitivity 79.3 ; 95 % confindence interval 71 – 85.2 %) and in 60 of 73 patients with chronic pancreatitis (specificity 82.2 [71.5 – 90.2 %]). Using contrast-enhanced EUS malignant pancreatic lesions were correctly diagnosed in 111 of 121 patients, thus increasing sensitivity to 91.7 (85.3 – 96 %). In 70 of 73 patients chronic inflammatory pancreatitis was correctly diagnosed (specificity 95.9 [88.5 – 99,1 %]).
Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound improves the differentiation between chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinoma.
Schlüsselwörter
kontrastverstärkte
Endosonographie - Pankreaskarzinom - chronische Pankreatitis - Feinnadelpunktion
Key words
diagnostic contrast enhanced endosonography - pancreatic cancer - chronic pancreatitis - fine needle aspiration
Literatur
- 1
Afify A M, al-Khafaji B M, Kim B, Scheiman J M.
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine deedle aspiration of the pancreas.
Acta cytol.
2003;
47
341-348
MissingFormLabel
- 2
Barthet M, Potal I, Boujaoude J, Bernard J P, Sahel J.
Endoscopic ultrasonography diagnosis of pancreatic cancer complicating chronic pancreatitis.
Endoscopy.
1996;
28
487-491
MissingFormLabel
- 3
Bhutani M S, Gress F G, Giovannini M.
The No Endosonographic Detection of Tumor (NEST) Study: a case series of pancreatic
cancers missed on endoscopic ultrasonography.
Endoscopy.
2004;
36
453-454
MissingFormLabel
- 4
Binmoeller K F, Rathod V D.
Difficult pancreatic mass FNA – tips for success.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2002;
56
S86-93
MissingFormLabel
- 5
Bosseckert H.
Wieviel Diagnostik ist beim Pankreaskarzinom nötig?.
Zbl Chir.
2003;
128
368-374
MissingFormLabel
- 6
Catalaon M F, Sial S, Chak A, Sivak Jr M V, Erickson R, Scheiman J, Gress F.
EUS-guided fine needle aspiration of idiopathic abdominal masses.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2002;
55
(7)
854-858
MissingFormLabel
- 7 Dietrich C F, Andre Ignee I I, Braden B, Barreiros A P, Ott M, Hocke M. Improved differentiation of pancreatic tumours using contrast enhanced endoscopic
ultrasound. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol in press
MissingFormLabel
- 8
Dite P, Pazourkova M, Ruzicka M, Precechtelova M, Novotny I, Dastych M.
Chronic pancreatitis as a risk factor for pancreatic carcinoma.
Vintr Lek.
2002;
48
(7)
638-641
MissingFormLabel
- 9
Eloubeidi M A, Varadarajulu S, Desai S.
A prospective evaluation of an algorithm incorporating routine preoperative endoscopic
ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in suspected pancreatic cancer.
Gastrointest Surg.
2007;
11
807-819
MissingFormLabel
- 10
Fazal S, Saif M W.
Supportive and palliative care of pancreatic cancer.
J Pancreas.
2007;
8
(2)
240-253
MissingFormLabel
- 11
Fritscher-Ravens A, Brand L, Knofel W T.
Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for focal pancreatic
lesions in patients with normal parenchyma and chronic pancreatitis.
Am J Gastroenterol.
2002;
97
2768-2775
MissingFormLabel
- 12
Hocke M, Schulze E, Gottschalk P, Topalidis T, Dietrich C F.
The use of contrast enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between focal
pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.
World J Gastroenterol.
2006;
12
246-250
MissingFormLabel
- 13
LeBlanc J K, Ciaccia D, Al-Assi M T.
Optimal number of EUS-guided fine needle passes needed to obtain a correct diagnosis.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2004;
59
475-481
MissingFormLabel
- 14
Majno G.
Chronic inflammation: links with angiogenesis and wound healing.
Am J Pathol.
1998;
153
1035-1039
MissingFormLabel
- 15
Matsuno S, Egawa S, Shibuya K.
Pancreatic cancer: current status of treatment and survival of 16 071 patients diagnosed
from 1981– 1996, using the Japanese Pancreatic Cancer Database.
Int J Clin Oncol.
2000;
1985
153-157
MissingFormLabel
- 16
Nakayama Y, Yamashita Y, Kadota M.
Vascular encasement by pancreatic cancer: correlation of CT findings with surgical
and pathologic results.
J Comput Assist Tomogr.
2001;
25
(3)
337-342
MissingFormLabel
- 17
Nattermann C, Goldschmidt A J, Dancygier H.
Endosonographie in der Dignitätsbeurteilung von Pankreastumoren: Ein Vergleich endosonographischer
Befunde von Karzinomen und segmentalen entzündlichen Veränderungen.
Dtsch Med Wochenschr.
1995;
120
1571-1576
MissingFormLabel
- 18
Prokesch R W, Chow L C, Beaulieu C F, Bammer R, Jeffrey jr R B .
Isoattenuating pancreatic adenocarcinoma at multi-detector row CT: secondary signs.
Radiology.
2002;
224
(3)
764-768
MissingFormLabel
- 19
Schmidt J, Ryschich E, Daniel V.
Vasculare structure and microcirculation of experimental pancreatic carcinoma in rats.
Eur J Surg.
2000;
166
328-335
MissingFormLabel
- 20
Südhoff T, Hollerbach S, Wilhelms I.
Klinische Wertigkeit der endosonographischen Feinnadelpunktion bei Erkrankungen des
oberen Gastrointestinaltraktes und des Mediastinums.
Dtsch Med Wochenschr.
2004;
129
2227-2232
MissingFormLabel
- 21
Takagi K, Takada T, Amano H.
A high peripheral microvessel density count correlates with a poor prognosis in pancreatic
cancer.
J Gastroenterol.
2005;
40
(4)
402-408
MissingFormLabel
- 22
Talamini G, Bassi C.
Early detection of pancreatic cancer following the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis.
Digestion.
1999;
60
554-561
MissingFormLabel
- 23
Taylor B.
Carcinoma of the head of the pancreas versus chronic pancreatitis.
World J Surg.
2003;
27
1249-1257
, PMID 14 502 404
MissingFormLabel
- 24
Ueda T, Oda T, Kinoshita T, Konishi M.
Neovascularization in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Oncology Rep.
2002;
9
239-245
MissingFormLabel
- 25
Volmar K E, Vollmer R T, Jowell P S, Nelson R C, Xie H B.
Pancreatic FNA in 1000 cases.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2005;
61
(7)
854-861
MissingFormLabel
- 26
Wiersema J M.
Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in diagnosing and staging pancreatic carcinoma.
Pancreatology.
2001;
1
625-632
MissingFormLabel
Dr. Michael Hocke
Klinik für Innere Medizin II
Klinikum Meiningen GmbH
Bergstraße 3
98617 Meiningen
Phone: 03693/901027
Fax: 03693/90181028
Email: Michael.Hocke@Klinikum-meiningen.de