摘要
AIM To establish the ability of magnetic resonance(MR) and computer tomography(CT) to predict pathologic dimensions of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors(Pan NET) in a caseload of a tertiary referral center.METHODS Patients submitted to surgery for Pan NET at the Surgical Unit of the Pancreas Institute with at least 1 preoperative imaging examination(MR or CT scan) from January 2005 to December 2015 were included and data retrospectively collected. Exclusion criteria were: multifocal lesions, genetic syndromes, microadenomas or mixed tumors, metastatic disease and neoadjuvant therapy. Bland-Altman(BA) and Mountain-Plot(MP) statistics were used to compare size measured by each modality with the pathology size. Passing-Bablok(PB) regression analysis was used to check the agreement between MR and CT.RESULTS Our study population consisted of 292 patients. Seventy-nine(27.1%) were functioning Pan NET. The mean biases were 0.17 ± 7.99 mm, 1 ± 8.51 mm and 0.23 ± 9 mm, 1.2 ± 9.8 mm for MR and CT, considering the overall population and the subgroup of non-functioning-Pan NET, respectively. Limits of agreement(LOA) included the vast majority of observations, indicating a good agreement between imaging and pathology. The MP further confirmed this finding and showed that the two methods are unbiased with respect to each other. Considering ≤ 2 cm non-functioning-Pan NET, no statistical significance was found in the size estimation rate of MR and CT(P = 0.433). PBR analysis did not reveal significant differences between MR, CT and pathology.CONCLUSION MR and CT scan are accurate and interchangeable imaging techniques in predicting pathologic dimensions of Pan NET.
AIMTo establish the ability of magnetic resonance (MR) and computer tomography (CT) to predict pathologic dimensions of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) in a caseload of a tertiary referral center.METHODSPatients submitted to surgery for PanNET at the Surgical Unit of the Pancreas Institute with at least 1 preoperative imaging examination (MR or CT scan) from January 2005 to December 2015 were included and data retrospectively collected. Exclusion criteria were: multifocal lesions, genetic syndromes, microadenomas or mixed tumors, metastatic disease and neoadjuvant therapy. Bland-Altman (BA) and Mountain-Plot (MP) statistics were used to compare size measured by each modality with the pathology size. Passing-Bablok (PB) regression analysis was used to check the agreement between MR and CT.RESULTSOur study population consisted of 292 patients. Seventy-nine (27.1%) were functioning PanNET. The mean biases were 0.17 ± 7.99 mm, 1 ± 8.51 mm and 0.23 ± 9 mm, 1.2 ± 9.8 mm for MR and CT, considering the overall population and the subgroup of non-functioning- PanNET, respectively. Limits of agreement (LOA) included the vast majority of observations, indicating a good agreement between imaging and pathology. The MP further confirmed this finding and showed that the two methods are unbiased with respect to each other. Considering ≤ 2 cm non-functioning-PanNET, no statistical significance was found in the size estimation rate of MR and CT (P = 0.433). PBR analysis did not reveal significant differences between MR, CT and pathology.CONCLUSIONMR and CT scan are accurate and interchangeable imaging techniques in predicting pathologic dimensions of PanNET.
