Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Jun 15, 2023; 15(6): 925-942
Published online Jun 15, 2023. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v15.i6.925
Table 1 Radiological differences in pancreatic masses
Imaging studio
AIP
MFCP
PDAC
Ultrasound
ConventionalHypoechoicHypoechoicHypoechoic
CEUS/CE-EUSHomogeneous enhancementHomogeneous enhancementNo enhancement
Eltasography by EUSPredominantly blue heterogeneous patternHeterogeneous pattern with a predominance of green color and blue stipplingHeterogeneous pattern with a predominance of blue color and green stippling
CT
SimpleHypodense; peripheral haloHypodense Intraparenchymal calcifications or within the pancreatic ductHypodense; parenchymal atrophy
ContrastedHyperattenuation (compared to the spleen) in the portal venous phase; presence of extrapancreatic involvementHeterogeneous hyperattenuation; absence of extrapancreatic involvementNo enhancement; vascular invasion
PerfusionLow BF and BV values compared to normal pancreatic parenchyma but higher than PDACLow BF and BV values compared to MFCP
Dual-energyAppears as a hypodense mass in low voltage imaging (especially during portal phase); in the iodine mapping the mass shows enhancement
MRI
T1Hypointense; hypointense peripheral haloHypointenseHypointense
T2Hyperintense; hypointense peripheral haloHyperintense: Early stage; hypointense: Advanced stageHyper/hypointense
DWIHyperintenseHyperintenseHyperintense
ADCHigher hypointensity than MFCP and PDACHypointenseHypointense
ElastographyHigher stiffness compared to normal parenchyma but lesser compared to PDAC; multiple scattered lesionsHigher stiffness compared to AIP; single, isolated nodular lesions