Department of Radiology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 13-1, Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Department of Radiology, Kanazawa University Hospital, 13-1, Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Eur Radiol. 2022 Jan;32(1):22-33. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08180-6. Epub 2021 Jul 14.
To determine the correlation between CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension, and survival in patients with PDAC.
This retrospective study included 87 patients with resected PDAC. Two radiologists evaluated negative ((i) tumours surrounded by the pancreatic parenchyma and (ii) tumours contacting the pancreatic surface) or positive ((iii) tumours with peri-pancreatic strand appearances and/or with expansive growth) CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension. Clinical, pathological, and CT imaging characteristics predicting disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Cox proportional-hazards models. Diagnostic accuracy for pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was also assessed.
CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension (42/87 tumours, 48.3%; κ = 0.82) had a higher hazard ratio (HR) for the DFS (HR, 5.30; p < 0.01) and OS (HR, 5.31; p < 0.01) rates than pathology-diagnosed extension in univariable analyses. It was also an independent prognostic factor for the DFS (HR, 4.22; p < 0.01) and OS (HR, 4.38; p < 0.01) rates in multivariable analyses. Of 45 tumours without CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension, pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was observed in 2/8 (25.0%) and 32/37 (86.5%) tumours with CT categories (i) and (ii), respectively. However, the differences in the survival rates between patients with CT categories (i) and (ii) were insignificant, although those in the latter category had significantly better survival rates than those with CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension (category (iii)).
CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was a better prognostic factor than pathology-diagnosed extension and considered an independent factor for the postoperative DFS and OS rates with reasonable frequency and high reproducibility, despite the low diagnostic accuracy for predicting pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension.
• A CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension had a higher hazard ratio for both disease-free survival and overall survival compared to pathology-diagnosed extension in univariable survival analyses. • A CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was a significant independent predictor of both disease-free survival and overall survival, as observed in multivariable survival analyses. • Patients with tumours contacting with the pancreatic surface on CT images (CT category (ii)) showed similar survival rates to those whose tumours were surrounded by the pancreatic parenchyma (CT category (i)), although many tumours with CT category (ii) extended pathologically beyond the pancreas.
确定 CT 诊断的胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)胰外扩展与病理诊断的胰外扩展和 PDAC 患者生存之间的相关性。
本回顾性研究纳入了 87 例接受胰腺切除术的 PDAC 患者。两名放射科医生评估了阴性(i)肿瘤被胰腺实质包围和(ii)肿瘤与胰腺表面接触)或阳性(iii)肿瘤具有胰周条索状外观和/或膨胀性生长)CT 诊断的胰外扩展。使用 Cox 比例风险模型评估预测无病生存率(DFS)和总生存率(OS)的临床、病理和 CT 影像学特征。还评估了病理诊断的胰外扩展的诊断准确性。
CT 诊断的胰外扩展(42/87 例肿瘤,48.3%;κ=0.82)在单变量分析中,DFS(HR,5.30;p<0.01)和 OS(HR,5.31;p<0.01)的风险比(HR)均高于病理诊断的扩展。在多变量分析中,它也是 DFS(HR,4.22;p<0.01)和 OS(HR,4.38;p<0.01)的独立预后因素。在没有 CT 诊断的胰外扩展的 45 例肿瘤中,在 CT 分类(i)和(ii)中,分别在 8/8(25.0%)和 32/37(86.5%)例肿瘤中观察到病理诊断的胰外扩展。然而,尽管后者的生存率明显优于 CT 诊断的胰外扩展(分类(iii)),但 CT 分类(i)和(ii)之间的生存率差异并不显著。
与病理诊断的扩展相比,CT 诊断的胰外扩展是一个更好的预后因素,尽管对预测病理诊断的胰外扩展的诊断准确性较低,但它被认为是术后 DFS 和 OS 率的独立因素,且具有合理的频率和较高的可重复性。
在单变量生存分析中,与病理诊断的胰外扩展相比,CT 诊断的胰外扩展对无病生存率和总生存率的 HR 更高。
在多变量生存分析中,CT 诊断的胰外扩展是无病生存率和总生存率的显著独立预测因素。
在 CT 图像上与胰腺表面接触的肿瘤(CT 分类(ii))的患者与被胰腺实质包围的肿瘤(CT 分类(i))的患者的生存率相似,尽管许多 CT 分类(ii)的肿瘤在病理上超出了胰腺。