Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40805252›Full record

ReviewCancers2025

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pancreatic Cyst Management: A Systematic Review.

Donghyun Lee, Fadel Jesry, John J Maliekkal, Lewis Goulder, Benjamin Huntly, Andrew M Smith, Yazan S Khaled

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

7 authors.

Donghyun LeeLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
Fadel JesryThe Pancreato-Biliary Unit, St. James's University Teaching Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
John J MaliekkalLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID 0009-0007-9036-3663
Lewis GoulderLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID 0009-0002-8991-8944
Benjamin HuntlyThe Pancreato-Biliary Unit, St. James's University Teaching Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9902-4541
Andrew M SmithLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
Yazan S KhaledLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6571-3579

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs), including intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs), pose a diagnostic challenge due to their variable malignant potential. Current guidelines, such as Fukuoka and American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), have moderate predictive accuracy and may lead to overtreatment or missed malignancies. Artificial intelligence (AI), incorporating machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), offers the potential to improve risk stratification, diagnosis, and management of PCLs by integrating clinical, radiological, and molecular data. This is the first systematic review to evaluate the application, performance, and clinical utility of AI models in the diagnosis, classification, prognosis, and management of pancreatic cysts.

methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251008593). Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library up to March 2025. The inclusion criteria encompassed original studies employing AI, ML, or DL in human subjects with pancreatic cysts, evaluating diagnostic, classification, or prognostic outcomes. Data were extracted on the study design, imaging modality, model type, sample size, performance metrics (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC)), and validation methods. Study quality and bias were assessed using the PROBAST and adherence to TRIPOD reporting guidelines.

resultsFrom 847 records, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were retrospective observational (n = 27, 87%) and focused on preoperative diagnostic applications (n = 30, 97%), with only one addressing prognosis. Imaging modalities included Computed Tomography (CT) (48%), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) (26%), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) (9.7%). Neural networks, particularly convolutional neural networks (CNNs), were the most common AI models (n = 16), followed by logistic regression (n = 4) and support vector machines (n = 3). The median reported AUC across studies was 0.912, with 55% of models achieving AUC ≥ 0.80. The models outperformed clinicians or existing guidelines in 11 studies. IPMN stratification and subtype classification were common focuses, with CNN-based EUS models achieving accuracies of up to 99.6%. Only 10 studies (32%) performed external validation. The risk of bias was high in 93.5% of studies, and TRIPOD adherence averaged 48%.

conclusionsAI demonstrates strong potential in improving the diagnosis and risk stratification of pancreatic cysts, with several models outperforming current clinical guidelines and human readers. However, widespread clinical adoption is hindered by high risk of bias, lack of external validation, and limited interpretability of complex models. Future work should prioritise multicentre prospective studies, standardised model reporting, and development of interpretable, externally validated tools to support clinical integration.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencebenigndiagnosisIPMNmachine learningmalignantMCNpancreatic cystprognosis

Identifiers

PMID40805252
PMCPMC12346778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.