Identification of patients with branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and very low risk of cancer: multicentre study.
Journal
The British journal of surgery
ISSN: 1365-2168
Titre abrégé: Br J Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0372553
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 06 2022
14 06 2022
Historique:
received:
26
02
2021
revised:
05
08
2021
accepted:
15
03
2022
pubmed:
6
5
2022
medline:
18
6
2022
entrez:
5
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Different surveillance strategies for patients with low-risk branch-duct (BD) intraductal papillary neoplasm (IPMN) have been described. The aim of this study was to describe the natural history of low-risk BD-IPMN, and to identify risk factors for the development of worrisome features (WF)/high-risk stigmata (HRS) and of pancreatic malignancies. This was a multicentre retrospective study of patients with BD-IPMN who were under active surveillance between January 2006 and December 2015. Patients were eligible if they had a low-risk lesion and had a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Outcomes were development of WF/HRS or cytologically/histologically confirmed malignant IPMN. Of 837 patients included, 168 (20 per cent) developed WF/HRS. At the end of the observation time, 132 patients (79 per cent) with WF/HRS were still under surveillance without progression to pancreatic cancer. Factors associated with the development of WF or HRS in multivariable analysis included localized nodules (versus diffuse: hazard ratio (HR) 0.43, 95 per cent c.i. 0.26 to 0.68), cyst size 15-19 mm (versus less than 15 mm: HR 1.88, 1.23 to 2.87) or at least 20 mm (versus less than 15 mm: HR 3.25, 2.30 to 4.60), main pancreatic duct size over 3 mm (versus 3 mm or less: HR 2.17, 1.41 to 3.34), and symptoms at diagnosis (versus no symptoms: HR 2.29, 1.52 to 3.45). Surveillance in an endoscopy-oriented centre was also associated with increased detection of WF or HRS (versus radiology-oriented: HR 2.46, 1.74 to 3.47). Conservative management of patients with low-risk BD-IPMN is safe and feasible.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Different surveillance strategies for patients with low-risk branch-duct (BD) intraductal papillary neoplasm (IPMN) have been described. The aim of this study was to describe the natural history of low-risk BD-IPMN, and to identify risk factors for the development of worrisome features (WF)/high-risk stigmata (HRS) and of pancreatic malignancies.
METHODS
This was a multicentre retrospective study of patients with BD-IPMN who were under active surveillance between January 2006 and December 2015. Patients were eligible if they had a low-risk lesion and had a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Outcomes were development of WF/HRS or cytologically/histologically confirmed malignant IPMN.
RESULTS
Of 837 patients included, 168 (20 per cent) developed WF/HRS. At the end of the observation time, 132 patients (79 per cent) with WF/HRS were still under surveillance without progression to pancreatic cancer. Factors associated with the development of WF or HRS in multivariable analysis included localized nodules (versus diffuse: hazard ratio (HR) 0.43, 95 per cent c.i. 0.26 to 0.68), cyst size 15-19 mm (versus less than 15 mm: HR 1.88, 1.23 to 2.87) or at least 20 mm (versus less than 15 mm: HR 3.25, 2.30 to 4.60), main pancreatic duct size over 3 mm (versus 3 mm or less: HR 2.17, 1.41 to 3.34), and symptoms at diagnosis (versus no symptoms: HR 2.29, 1.52 to 3.45). Surveillance in an endoscopy-oriented centre was also associated with increased detection of WF or HRS (versus radiology-oriented: HR 2.46, 1.74 to 3.47).
CONCLUSION
Conservative management of patients with low-risk BD-IPMN is safe and feasible.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35511697
pii: 6577178
doi: 10.1093/bjs/znac103
pmc: PMC10364743
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
617-622Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.
Références
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2019 Dec 20;32(4):e1471
pubmed: 31859924
Pancreatology. 2019 Jan;19(1):2-9
pubmed: 30503370
Dig Liver Dis. 2014 Jun;46(6):479-93
pubmed: 24809235
Gut. 2018 Jan;67(1):138-145
pubmed: 28877981
Pancreatology. 2012 May-Jun;12(3):183-97
pubmed: 22687371
Ann Surg. 2004 May;239(5):678-85; discussion 685-7
pubmed: 15082972
Pancreatology. 2006;6(1-2):17-32
pubmed: 16327281
Pancreatology. 2018 Mar;18(2):170-175
pubmed: 29338919
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Nov 2;3(11):e2022933
pubmed: 33252689
Gut. 2017 Mar;66(3):495-506
pubmed: 26743012
Pancreatology. 2017 Sep - Oct;17(5):738-753
pubmed: 28735806
Gut. 2018 May;67(5):789-804
pubmed: 29574408
Br J Surg. 2018 Dec;105(13):1825-1834
pubmed: 30106195
Am J Gastroenterol. 2019 Oct;114(10):1678-1684
pubmed: 31449158
Gastroenterology. 2015 Apr;148(4):819-22; quize12-3
pubmed: 25805375
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jul;112(7):1153-1161
pubmed: 28244498
Gastroenterology. 2017 Nov;153(5):1284-1294.e1
pubmed: 28739282
Ann Pathol. 2011 Nov;31(5 Suppl):S27-31
pubmed: 22054452
Dig Liver Dis. 2016 May;48(5):473-479
pubmed: 26965783
Ann Surg. 2020 Dec;272(6):1118-1124
pubmed: 30672797