ArticleAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2024
Comparative accuracy of four guidelines to predict high-grade dysplasia or malignancy in surgically resected pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: Small nuances between guidelines lead to vastly different results.
Article in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Serum CA19.9 for Detecting High-Grade Dysplasia and Invasive Carcinoma in Patients With Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2026Pooled it
- Current Considerations in Nonoperative Surveillance of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms.Digestive disease interventions · 2025Article
- Endoscopic techniques for the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds/Aims: The guidelines regarding the management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) all have slightly different surgical indications for high-risk lesions. We aim to retrospectively compare the accuracy of four guidelines in recommending surgery for high-risk IPMNs, and assess the accuracy of elevated CA-19-9 levels and imaging characteristics of IPMNs considered high-risk in predicting malignancy or high-grade dysplasia (HGD). Methods: The final histopathological diagnosis of surgically resected high-risk IPMNs during 2013-2020 were compared to preoperative surgical indications, as enumerated in four guidelines: the 2015 American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), 2017 International Consensus, 2018 European Study Group, and 2018 American College of Gastroenterology (ACG). Surgery was considered "justified" if histopathology of the surgical specimen showed HGD/malignancy, or there was postoperative symptomatic improvement. Results: Surgery was postoperatively justified in 26/65 (40.0%) cases. All IPMNs with HGD/malignancy were detected by the 2018 ACG and the combined (absolute and relative criteria) 2018 European guidelines. The combined ("high-risk stigmata" and "worrisome features") 2017 International guideline missed 1/19 (5.3%) IPMNs with HGD/malignancy. The 2015 AGA guideline missed the most cases (11/19, 57.9%) of IPMNs with HGD/malignancy. We found the features most-associated with HGD/malignancy were pancreatic ductal dilation, and elevated CA-19-9 levels. Conclusions: Following the 2015 AGA guideline results in the highest rate of missed HGD/malignancy, but the lowest rate of operating on IPMNs without these features; meanwhile, the 2018 ACG and the combined (absolute and relative criteria) 2018 European guidelines result in more operations for IPMNs without HGD/malignancy, but the lowest rates of missed HGD/malignancy in IPMNs.
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.