ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2015
Impact of the time interval between MDCT imaging and surgery on the accuracy of identifying metastatic disease in patients with pancreatic cancer.
Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of time to surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Imaging-based diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of direct comparative studies.European radiology · 2026Article
- CT-based vascular invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with intraoperative and histological findings.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Preoperative assessment of pancreatic cancer with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: the latest on diagnosis, molecular profiling, and systemic treatments.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Does an extensive diagnostic workup for upfront resectable pancreatic cancer result in a delay which affects survival? Results from an international multicentre study.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2023Article
- Computed Tomography-Based Radiomics Using Tumor and Vessel Features to Assess Resectability in Cancer of the Pancreatic Head.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Metastatic pancreatic cancer: Mechanisms and detection (Review).Oncology reports · 2021Review
- Review
- The Role of Imaging in Current Treatment Strategies for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.Korean journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Pretherapeutic Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer: Comparison of FDG PET/CT Plus Delayed PET/MR and Contrast-Enhanced CT/MR.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Use of imaging as staging and surgical planning for pancreatic surgery.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2020Review
- Article
- Evaluation of the clinical and economic impact of delays to surgery in patients with periampullary cancer.BJS open · 2019Article
- Receipt of Curative Resection or Palliative Care for Hepatopancreaticobiliary Tumours (RICOCHET): Protocol for a Nationwide Collaborative Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- Determining Optimal Routes to Surgery for Borderline Resectable Venous Pancreatic Cancer-Where Is the Least Harm and Most Benefit?Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
- Benefits Of Timely Care In Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review To Navigate Through The Contradictory Evidence.Cancer management and research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePancreatic adenocarcinoma is a rapidly progressive malignancy characterized by its tendency for early metastatic spread. MDCT is the primary diagnostic modality for the preoperative staging of patients with pancreatic cancer, with an accuracy established in multiple studies. However, for a variety of reasons, there is often a prolonged interval between staging MDCT and the surgical intervention. This study examines the relationship between the interval between imaging and surgery and the accuracy of MDCT in determining the presence or absence of metastatic disease at surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients were identified who had undergone surgery for pancreatic cancer at our institution with a dedicated preoperative pancreas-protocol MDCT performed in our department. Findings from the preoperative MDCT report were correlated with the operative findings, as well as the time between imaging and surgery.
resultsTwo hundred ninety-two MDCT scans were performed on 256 patients who underwent exploration for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The patients had a median age of 67 years (range, 30-95 years), and 51.6% (132/256) were male. The median time between MDCT and surgical exploration was 15.5 days (range, 1-198 days). MDCT correctly predicted the absence of metastatic disease at surgery in 233 of 274 (85.0%) studies. MDCT was more accurate in predicting the absence of metastatic disease if the study was performed within 25 days of surgery than it was if the study was performed within more than 25 days of surgery (89.3% vs 77.0%; p = 0.0097). Furthermore, regression models showed that the negative predictive value of a given MDCT significantly decreased after approximately 4 weeks.
conclusionMDCT is an accurate method to stage patients with pancreatic cancer, but its accuracy in excluding distant metastatic disease depreciates over time. Patients should undergo a repeat MDCT within 25 days of any planned definitive operative intervention for pancreatic cancer to avoid unexpectedly finding metastatic disease at surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.