ArticleAnnals of surgery2026
The Surveillance Strategy for Intraductal Pancreatic Mucinous Neoplasms: Criteria for Discontinuation.
Article in Annals of surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- MRCP surveillance of low-risk branch-duct IPMNs: longitudinal size changes and clinical outcomes in a real-world cohort.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Use of an Algo-Based Decision-Making Tool to Compare Real-Life Clinical Practice in a Single Tertiary Center with the Kyoto IPMN Surveillance Recommendations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Portuguese Pancreatic Club Perspective on Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm Diagnosis, Characterization and Indications for Fine-Needle Aspiration/Biopsy, Advanced Endoscopic Ultrasound Imaging Techniques and Role of Pancreatoscopy.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo review the surveillance of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN), the risk of pancreatic cancer, and the cost of surveillance.
backgroundThe increasing IPMN prevalence and low pancreatic cancer associated with IPMN question the necessity and cost-effectiveness of surveillance. Guidelines favor a "watch and wait" approach, lacking clarity on stopping surveillance. This study aims to identify patients with pancreatic cancer risk equivalent to their age group, create guidelines for stopping surveillance, and reduce National Health Service costs.
methodsRetrospective analysis of patients with IPMN on surveillance in the West of Scotland. Clinicopathological data were collected. Endpoints included pancreatic cancer development and surveillance pathway cost estimation. Age-matched controls were used for comparison using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for pancreatic cancer.
resultsOf 746 patients, 27 (3.62%) were resected. Three (0.402%) developed pancreatic cancer and 44 (5.90%) developed worrisome features/high-risk stigmata after a median surveillance of 48 (interquartile range: 48) months. Two hundred twenty-one (29.6%) had a stable cyst for at least 5 years and their SIR was 1.56 (95% CI: 0.04-8.71). For patients ≥75 years with stable cysts for ≥5 years, SIR was 1.71 (95% CI: 0.03-3.42). Patients ≥65 years with stable cysts of <15 mm for ≥5 years and patients with stable cysts of <10 mm for ≥5 years had SIRs of 0. The cost of surveillance was £6,330.36 ($8,105.65) per resected patient and £2,032.78 ($2,602.85) per nonresected patient.
conclusionsPatients with stable IPMNs have similar pancreatic cancer risk as the general population. Surveillance discontinuation can be considered after 5 years in a cohort of patients, saving £106,211.19 ($136,020.42) per year.
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.