摘要
The management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms(IPMN) is presently evolving as a result of the improved understanding of the natural history and biological behavior of the different pancreatic cystic neoplasms; and better preoperative diagnosis of these neoplasms due to advancement in preoperative diagnostic tools. International consensus guidelines for the management of IPMN were first formulated in 2006 and subsequently revised in 2012. Both these guidelines were constructed based on expert opinion and not on robust clinical data. The main limitation of the original Sendai guidelines was that it had a low positive predictive value resulting in many benign neoplasms being resected. Hence,these guidelines were revised in 2012. However,although the updated guidelines resulted in an improvement in the positive predictive value over the Sendai Guidelines,the results of several studies validating these guidelines demonstrated that its positive predictive value remained low. Furthermore,although both guidelines were associated with high negative predictive values,several investigators have demonstrated that some malignant IPMNs may be missed. Finally,it is imperative to emphasize that major considerations when managing a patient with IPMN including the patient's surgical risk,life-expectancy and even cost of investigations are not taken into account in current guidelines. The management of a patient with IPMN should be individualized and tailored according to a patient's risk benefit profile for resection vs surveillance.
The management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms(IPMN) is presently evolving as a result of the improved understanding of the natural history and biological behavior of the different pancreatic cystic neoplasms; and better preoperative diagnosis of these neoplasms due to advancement in preoperative diagnostic tools. International consensus guidelines for the management of IPMN were first formulated in 2006 and subsequently revised in 2012. Both these guidelines were constructed based on expert opinion and not on robust clinical data. The main limitation of the original Sendai guidelines was that it had a low positive predictive value resulting in many benign neoplasms being resected. Hence,these guidelines were revised in 2012. However,although the updated guidelines resulted in an improvement in the positive predictive value over the Sendai Guidelines,the results of several studies validating these guidelines demonstrated that its positive predictive value remained low. Furthermore,although both guidelines were associated with high negative predictive values,several investigators have demonstrated that some malignant IPMNs may be missed. Finally,it is imperative to emphasize that major considerations when managing a patient with IPMN including the patient’s surgical risk,life-expectancy and even cost of investigations are not taken into account in current guidelines. The management of a patient with IPMN should be individualized and tailored according to a patient’s risk benefit profile for resection vs surveillance.
