Features associated with progression of small pancreatic cystic lesions: A retrospective study

Table 1 Clinical characteristics of patients

	Non-progression group (n = 45)	Minimal-change group (n = 41)	Progression group (n = 49)
Follow-up (yr)	3.6 ± 2.01	5.6 ± 2.023	4.3 ± 2.51
Age (yr)	67.9 ± 10.3	63.2 ± 12.93	70.0 ± 13.01
Sex (M:F)	29:16	33:8	32:17

¹Significant difference vs minimal-change group;

²Significant difference vs non-progression group;

³Significant difference vs progression group. By ANOVA and χ² test, data are expressed as the mean ± SD.

Table 2 Imaging characteristics of cysts n (%)

	Non-progression group (n = 45)	Minimal-change group (n = 41)	Progression group(n = 49)
Lesion characteristics
Initial size (mm)	12.0 ± 5.4	11.6 ± 6.5	13.8 ± 7.4
Multiple cystic lesions	3 (6.7)	5 (12.2)	9 (18.4)
Location
Uncinate	1 (0.2)	1 (2.4)	4 (8.2)
Head	9 (20.0)	9 (22.0)	13 (26.5)
Neck	17 (37.8)	7 (17.1)	9 (18.4)
Body	10 (22.2)	14 (34.1)	12 (24.5)
Tail	8 (17.8)	10 (24.4)	11 (22.4)
Imaging features
Septation	4 (8.9)1	5 (12.2)	13 (26.5)2
Tubular cyst	5 (11.1)1	8 (19.5)	14 (28.6)2
Calcification	2 (4.5)	1 (2.5)	1 (2.0)
Prominent pancreatic duct	0 (0)1	3 (7.3)	9 (18.4)2

¹Significant difference vs the progression group;

²Significant difference vs the non-progression group, by ANOVA and χ² test. Data are expressed as the mean ± SD.

Table 3 Regression analysis between non-progression and progression groups

	Univariate		Multivariate
	OR (95%CI)	P value	OR (95%CI)	P value
Septation	3.701 (1.107-2.372)	0.034	5.318 (1.539-18.374)	0.008
Tubular content	3.200 (1.047-9.782)	0.041	4.582 (1.450-14.480)	0.010

By binary logistic regression analysis.