ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Differentiation of intrapancreatic accessory spleen from pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor using MRI R2.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. 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.
- Intrapancreatic accessory spleen mimicking pancreatic malignancy: Diagnostic role of Tc-99m heat-damaged red blood cell scintigraphy.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Clinical and imaging differentiation of intrapancreatic accessory spleen from pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor and solid-pseudopapillary tumor: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- From the anal canal to the pancreas: diagnostic challenges of radiologic surveillance in detecting rare but potentially curable metastases - a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the performance of R2* in distinguishing intrapancreatic accessory spleens (IPASs) from pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs).
methodsTwo radiologists (R1 and R2) retrospectively reviewed the MRIs of 20 IPAS and 20 PNET patients. IPASs were diagnosed with uptake on 99mTc labeled heat-damaged red blood cell scintigraphy or characteristic findings on CT/MRI and ≥ 12 month-long-stability. PNETs were histopathologically diagnosed with resection. Using McNemar test, sensitivities and specificities of the diagnostic criterion based on R2* mass-to-spleen ratio (MSR) were compared with those of the other criteria using contrast-enhanced (CE) MRI and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) MSR.
resultsThe study included 40 patients (median age, 54; interquartile range, 43-65; 24 men, 16 women). IPASs exhibited spleen-isointensity on T2WI, late arterial and portal phases, and diffusion-weighted images more frequently than PNETs (p <.05). ADC MSRs were lower (p <.001) and R2* MSRs were higher (p <.001) in IPASs compared to PNETs. For R1, sensitivity and specificity were 45.0% and 100.0% for criterion 1 (spleen-isointensity on CE-MRI); 45.0% and 85.0% for criterion 2 (ADC MSR ≤ 1.08); 90.0% and 95.0% for criterion 3 (0.9 ≤ R2* MSR ≤ 1.7). For R2, 75.0% and 100.0%; 45.0% and 90.0%; 90.0% and 100.0%. Criterion 3 showed higher sensitivity than criterion 1 for R1 (p =.004), and criterion 2 for R1 and R2 (p =.012). There was no difference in specificity.
conclusionFor differentiating IPAS from PNET, R2* showed higher sensitivity than, and similar specificity to CE-MRI and ADC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39841231What 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.