Editorial
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Jul 25, 2015; 7(9): 833-842
Published online Jul 25, 2015. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i9.833
Table 1 Summary of diagnostic yields of endoscopic ultrasound based protocols for familiar pancreatic cancer screening in high risk individuals
Ref.Patients and syndromeDiagnostic Yield1 of EUSNo. of solid lesions (mass or nodule)No. of cystic lesionsNo. with chronic pancreatitis featuresNo. with pre/malignant lesions suspected at baseline or FUNumber with histologically confirmed target lesions for which treatment can be considered a success2
Brentnall et al[16]13 (FPC)46.2%--10 (77%)6 (46.2%)?
Kimmey et al[17]46 (FPC)26%--24 (52.2%)12 (26%)?
Canto et al[18]38 (FPC, PJS)10.5%12 (31.5%)-17 (44.7%)6 (15.7%)2/7 patients who underwent resection (1 PDAC, 1 PanIN3)
Canto et al[19]78 (FPC, PJS)10.2%8 (10.2%)9 (11.8%)61 (78.2%)8 (10.2%)3/7 patients who underwent resection (1 IPMN+ca in situ, 1 IPMN + PanIN3, 1 PanIN3)
Poley et al[20]44 (FPC, PJS, FAMM, FBOC, HP, LFS)22.7%3 (6.8%)7 (16%)3 (6.8%)10 (22.7%)3/3 patients who underwent resection (3 PDAC)
Langer et al[21]76 (FPC, FAMM)2.6%7 (9.2%)3 (3.9%)17 (22.3%)7 (11.8%)0/7 patients who underwent resection
Verna et al[23]31 (FPC, FBOC)22.5%2 (6.4)12 (38.7)9 (29%)7 (22.6%)1/5 who underwent surgery (1 PDAC)
Canto et al[24]216 (FPC, FBOC, PJS)37%3 (1.4%)79 (36%)54 (25%)79 (37%)3/5 who underwent surgery (2 MD-IPMN, 1 BD-IPMN + panIN3)
Total54222.2%35 (6.5%)110 ( 20.3%)195 (36%)135 (25%)12/542 (2.2%) of total
Table 2 Summary of diagnostic yield of magnetic resonance imaging based protocols for familiar pancreatic cancer screening in high risk individuals
Ref.Patients and syndromeDiagnostic Yield1 of MRINo. of solid lesions (mass or nodule)No. of cystic lesionsNo. with chronic pancreatitis featuresNo. with pre/malignant lesions suspected at baseline or FUNumber with histologically target lesions for which treatment has to be considered a success2
Langer et al[21]76 (FAMMM, MPCS, FBOC)23.3%6 (7.8%)2 (2.6%)1 (1.3%)12 (15%)1/7 who underwent surgery (1 PDAC)
Vasen et al[27]77 (FAMMM)20.7%7 (9%)Not specified9 (11.6%)7 (9%)4/5 who underwent surgery (4 R0 PDAC)
Ludwig et al[28]109 (FPC)16.5%1 (0.9%)Not specified2 (1.8%)18 (17.4%)4/6 who underwent surgery (2 MD-IPMN, 1 PDAC, 1 PanIn3)
Canto et al[24]216 (PJG, FPC, FBOC)33.7%1 (0.4%)71 (32.8%)-45 (20.8%)3/5 who underwent surgery (1 MD-IPMN + HGD, 1MD IPMN, 1 BD IPMN + PNET + HGD)
Al-Sukhni et al[25]226 (PJG, FPC, FBOC, FAMMM, HP)50.4%2 (0.8%)80 (35.3%)25 (11%)5 (2%)1/4 who underwent surgery (1 PDAC)
Verna et al[23]33 (FPC, FAMMM, FBOC, HNPCC)3.3%3 (9%)7 (21.2%)1 (3%)5 (15%)Not specified how may pathological reports had been previously described in MRI
Del Chiaro et al[30]40 (FPC, BRAC 2, BRAC 1, FAMMM)40%3 (7.5%)14 (35%)-4 (10%)5/5 (3 PDAC: 1 of them T1N0M0, 1 developed on a synchronous BD-IPMN in FU; 2 intermediate grade dysplasia IPMN of which one mixed type and one branch duct )
Total77726.8%23 (2.9%)174 (22.39%)38 (4.8%)96 (12.35%)18/777 (2.3%) of total