Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36897348›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2023

Determination of arterial invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: what is the best diagnostic criterion on CT?

Yoshifumi Noda, Nozomi Mizuno, Nobuyuki Kawai, Tomohiro Ando, Masaya Kawaguchi, Shoma Nagata, Keita Fujimoto, Fumihiko Nakamura, Tetsuro Kaga, Takuma Ishihara and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Yoshifumi NodaDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan. noda1031@gifu-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3611-4790
Nozomi MizunoDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Nobuyuki KawaiDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Tomohiro AndoDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Masaya KawaguchiDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Shoma NagataDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Keita FujimotoDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Fumihiko NakamuraDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Tetsuro KagaDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Takuma IshiharaInnovative and Clinical Research Promotion Center, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Fuminori HyodoDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Hiroki KatoDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Avinash R KambadakoneDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, White 270, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Masayuki MatsuoDepartment of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the diagnostic performance and interobserver variability in the determination of arterial invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and determine the best CT imaging criterion.

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 128 patients with PDAC (73 men and 55 women) who underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced CT. Five board-certified radiologists (expert) and four fellows (non-expert]) independently assessed the arterial invasion (celiac, superior mesenteric, splenic, and common hepatic arteries) using a 6-point score: 1, no tumor contact; 2, hazy attenuation ≤ 180°; 3, hazy attenuation > 180°; 4, solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180°; 5, solid soft tissue contact > 180°; and 6, contour irregularity. ROC analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and determine the best diagnostic criterion for arterial invasion, with pathological or surgical findings as references. Interobserver variability was assessed using Fleiss's ĸ statistics.

resultsAmong the 128 patients, 35.2% (n = 45/128) received neoadjuvant treatment (NTx). Solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180° was the best diagnostic criterion for arterial invasion as defined by the Youden Index both in patients who did and did not receive NTx (sensitivity, 100% vs. 100%; specificity, 90% vs. 93%; and AUC, 0.96 vs. 0.98, respectively). Interobserver variability among the non-expert was not inferior to that among the expert (ĸ = 0.61 vs 0.61; p = .39 and ĸ = 0.59 vs 0.51; p < .001 in patients treated with and without NTx, respectively).

conclusionsSolid soft tissue contact ≤ 180° was the best diagnostic criterion for the determination of arterial invasion in PDAC. Considerable interobserver variability was seen among the radiologists. KEY POINTS: • Solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180° was the best diagnostic criterion for the determination of arterial invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. • Interobserver agreement among non-expert radiologists was almost comparable to that among expert radiologists.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalPancreatic NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedMultidetector computed tomographyObserver variationPancreatic cancer

Identifiers

PMID36897348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.