4.4 Article

Signal intensity of the pancreas on magnetic resonance imaging: Prediction of postoperative pancreatic fistula after a distal pancreatectomy using a triple-row stapler

Journal

PANCREATOLOGY
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages 380-386

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2015.05.479

Keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging; Pancreatic signal intensity; Pancreatic fistula; Distal pancreatectomy; Stapler closure; Pancreatic thickness

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the pancreatic signal intensity (SI) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRD findings for predicting the development of pancreatic fistula (PF) after a distal pancreatectomy (DP) involving a triple-row stapler closure. Methods: A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for clinical PF, as defined by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula grade B or C. The pancreas-to-muscle SI ratio was evaluated using fat-suppressed T1-weighted MRI. Results: Of the 41 enrolled patients, 8 (19.5%) developed clinical PP. The pancreatic thickness (>= 15 mm) and SI ratio (>= 1.3) were identified as independent predictors of clinical PF in a multivariate analysis. Clinical PF was observed in one patient with a thick pancreas and a low SI ratio (14.3%), whereas it was observed in 60% of the patients with a thick pancreas and a high SI ratio. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for a predictive model consisting of the two factors was 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.99), the level of which tended to be greater than that for pancreatic thickness alone (0.81, p = 0.09). Conclusions: The SI ratio as evaluated using MRI might be useful for predicting clinical PF in patients with the pancreatic thickness >= 15 mm after DP involving a stapler closure. Copyright (C) 2015, IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier India, a division of Reed Elsevier India Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available