Pozzo-Salvatierra BL, Kimura-Fujikami K

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 95-104
PDF size: 572.42 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The term periampullary tumor includes four neoplasms which originate within 2 cm of the major duodenal papilla: ampullary, biliary (intrapancreatic segment), pancreatic (uncinate process and head), and duodenal. Cancer of the pancreas accounts for 50 to 70% of cases.
Material and methods. The clinical characteristics and staging of periampullary tumors, and the usefulness of different imaging methods in their characterization and differentiation are examined.
Discussion. Because ampullary and duodenal neoplasms have a better prognosis than pancreatobiliary neoplasms, differentiation between types of periampullary tumor, and proper staging in diagnosis, is important in therapeutic planning, allowing us to identify cases that may benefit from a pancreatoduodenectomy or avoid unnecessary surgery. In pancreatic or biliary cancer staging has less influence on surgical strategy; however, it seriously affects the prognosis.
Conclusion. Studies of multidetector tomography, magnetic resonance, and cholangiopancreatography by magnetic resonance are highly useful in pre- and post-operatory diagnosis of periampullary neoplasms. However, the development of an optimal study protocol is essential to maximize the sensitivity and specificity of these imaging methods.

REFERENCES

1. Sarmiento JM, Nagorney DM, Sarr MG, et al. Periampullary cancers: are there differences? Surg Clin North Am 2001;81:543-555.

2. Kim JH, Kim MJ, Chung JJ, et al. Differential diagnosis of periampullary carcinomas at MR Imaging. Radio Graphics 2002;22:1335-1352.

3. Granados GM, Herrera GA; Cáncer de Páncreas en manual de Oncología, Procedimientos médicoquirúrgicos. Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, 4ta edición, México 2010:649.

4. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Sohn TA, et al: Six hundred fifty consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies in the 1990s: Pathology, complications and outcomes. Ann Surg 1997;226:248.

5. Kim S, Kyung NL, Woo J, et al. CT Evaluation of the Bulging Papilla with Endoscopic Correlation. Radio Graphics 2007;27:1023-1038.

6. Sugita R, Furuta A, Ito K, et al. Periampullary tumors: highspatial- resolution MR Imaging and histophatologic findings in ampullary region specimens. Radiology 2004;231:767-774.

7. Pham DT, Hura SA, Willmann JK, et al. Evaluation of Periampullary Pathology With CT Volumetric Oblique Coronal Reformations. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:202-208.

8. Patel HT, Shah AJ, Khandelwal SR, et al. MR Cholangiopancreatography at 3.0 T. Radio Graphics 2009;29:1689-1706.

9. Kim MJ, Mitchell DG, Ito K, Outwater EK. Biliary dilatation: differentiation of benign from malignant causes – value of adding convencional MR Imaging to MR cholangiopancreatography. Radiology 2000;214:173-181.

10. Merkle EM and Dale BM. Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: The Basics Revisited. Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:1524-1532.

11. Fletcher JG, Wiersema MJ, Farrell MA, et al. Pancreatic malignancy: value of arterial, pancreatic, and hepatic phase Imaging with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 2003;229(1):81-90.

12. Goshima S, Kanematsu M, Kondo H, et al. Pancreas: Optimal Scan Delay for Contrast-enhanced Multi-Detector Row CT. Radiology 2006;241(1):168-174.

13. Yanaga Y, Awai K, Nakayama Y, et al. Pancreas: Patient Body Weight-tailored Contrast Material Injection Protocol versus Fixed Dose Protocol at Dynamic CT. Radiology 2007;245:475-482.

14. McNulty NJ, Francis IR, Platt JF, et al. Multi-Detector Row Helical CT of the Pancreas: Effect of Contrast-enhanced Multiphasic Imaging on Enhancement of the Pancreas, Peripancreatic Vasculature, and Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Radiology 2001;220:97-102.

15. Kim JH, Park SH, Yu ES, et al. Visually Isoattenuating Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Dynamic-Enhanced CT: Frequency, Clinical and Pathologic Characteristics, and Diagnosis at Imaging Examinations. Radiology 2011;(1):259.

16. Lee JK, Sagel SS and Huete A. Computed body tomography with MRI correlation. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006.

17. Lepanto L, Arzoumanian Y, Gianfelice D, Perreault P, et al. Helical CT with CT Angiography in Assesing Periampullary Neoplasms: Identification of Vascular Invasion. Radiology 2002;222:347-352.

18. Irie H, Honda H, Kuroiwa T, et al. Pitfalls in MR Cholangiopancreatographic Interpretation. Radio Graphics 2001;21:23-37.

19. Jae Hoon Lim. Cholangiocarcinoma Morphologic Classification According to Growth Pattern and Imaging Findings. AJR 2003;181:819-827.

20. Silva AC, Friese JL, et al. MR Cholangiopancreatography: Improved Ductal Distention with Intravenous Morphine Administration. Radio Graphics 2004;24:677-687.