4.3 Article

One Hundred Twenty-One Resected Solid Pseudopapillary Tumors of the Pancreas: An 8-Year Single-Institution Experience at Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai, China

Journal

PANCREAS
Volume 46, Issue 8, Pages 1023-1028

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000885

Keywords

solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas; postoperative complications; risk factors of recurrence

Funding

  1. Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning [2013SY053]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives The aims of this study were to introduce our experience with treating patients with pancreatic solid pseudopapillary tumors (SPTs) and to investigate the clinical risk factors for recurrence of SPTs because no consensus has been established to date. Methods One hundred twenty-one patients underwent surgical resection from January 2008 to December 2015 in our institution. Clinical data were collected from the standardized reports. Results Of the 121 patients, 93 (76.9%) were women, 28 (23.1%) were men, and the mean age at diagnosis was 33.7 years (range, 11-68 years). Sixty patients were subjected to short-term complications, and 8 patients experienced long-term complications, some of whom may require surgery. The tumor located in the distal pancreas (P = 0.02), and a Ki-67 index value > 1.5 (P = 0.01) indicated malignancy according to the World Health Organization 2000 classification. One hundred three patients responded to follow-up, and 3 cases (2.9%) were subject to liver metastases. Recurrence was more frequently observed in tumors classified as high-grade malignancies according to the World Health Organization 2010 classification (P = 0.013), synchronous metastases (P < 0.001), peripancreatic fat infiltration (P = 0.018), and lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.001). Conclusions Evaluating the risk of the recurrence of SPTs still requires systematic and multicenter trials in the future, even some pathological features showed statistical differences.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available