Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pancreatic cancer—EUS and early diagnosis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Over the last decades, the incidence of pancreatic cancer has increased. Prognosis remains poor despite rapid improvements in imaging technologies and therapeutic modalities. Curative treatment is dependant on early diagnosis.

Material and methods

One of the most promising techniques for early detection of pancreatic lesions seems to be endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). With or without fine needle aspiration (FNA), it has been described as highly sensitive and accurate in staging. Superior to other imaging modalities in early studies, results in later publications declined.

There are three fundamental different techniques of EUS available at present: radial scanning scopes, linear scanning scopes and radial or linear scanning probes, each with different pros and cons. Indications for EUS are persistent epigastric and/or back pain, acute onset of diabetes in the elderly, unclairified weight loss and suspect results in ultrasonography, especially in individuals over 45 years of age and in high-risk subpopulations.

Results

In early studies, EUS was superior or at least equal to other imaging modalities regarding sensitivity, determining tumour size and extent, lymph node involvement and vascular infiltration. With rapid advances in technology, first of all, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging have reached better results. The highest accuracy in assessing extent of primary tumour, locoregional extension, vascular invasion, distant metastasis, tumour TNM stage and tumour resectability seems to have helical CT, whereas EUS has the highest accuracy in assessing tumour size and lymph node involvement. For assessment of tumour resectability, a combination of CT and EUS seems to be the procedure with the highest accuracy.

Some new techniques promise improvement of the diagnostic yield of EUS. In differentiation to focal inflammation, contrast-enhanced EUS has shown to increase sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic cancer. Another major problem is the assessment of vascular invasion. 3D reconstructions additional to conventional EUS seemed to improve the evaluation of vessel–tumour-relationships.

Endoscopic ultrasound is not a foolproof method; there are several reasons for failure, and it shows a high interobserver variety even among experienced endosonographers. Nevertheless, EUS proved to have a high negative predictive value.

Poor overall survival rates and some reports of high survival rates among small resected stage 1 ductal adenocarcinomas suggest a high benefit for screening and early detection of pancreatic neoplasia, and treatment of precursor lesions might prevent their progression to invasive cancer. Because of low incidence and the lack of accurate, inexpensive and non-invasive diagnostic tests for early disease, screening for pancreatic cancer and its precursor lesions in the entire population is not reasonable. But a EUS- and CT-based screening among high-risk individuals discovered pancreatic neoplasms in eight of 78 patients, in contrast to no pancreatic neoplasia among 149 control subjects.

Conclusion

Screening for pancreatic cancer and its precursor lesions in the general population is not feasible, but high-risk subpopulations seem to be suitable targets for screening programs. EUS is an essential tool for diagnosis and assessment of extension and resectability of pancreatic tumours.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ries LAG, Harkins D, Krapcho M, Mariotto A, Miller BA, Feuer EJ, Clegg L, Eisner MP, Horner MJ, Howlader N, Hayat M, Hankey BF, Edwards BK. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2003, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD

  2. Carpelan-Holmström M, Nordling S, Pukkala E, Sankila R, Luttges J, Kloppel G, Haglund C (2005) Does anyone survive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? A nationwide study re-evaluating the data of the Finnish Cancer Registry. Gut 54:385–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Niwa K, Hirooka Y, Niwa Y, Itoh A, Ohmiya N, Hashimoto S, Ishikawa H, Okada N, Itoh T Goto H (2004) Comparison of image quality between electronic and mechanical radial scanning echoendoscopes in pancreatic diseases. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 19:454–459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gress F, Savides T, Cummings O, Sherman S, Lehman G, Zaidi S, Hawes R (1997) Radial scanning and linear array endosonography for staging pancreatic cancer: a prospective randomized comparison. Gastrointest Endosc 45:243–250

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rösch T (ed) (1995) Endoscopic ultrasonography: state of the art 1995, part 2. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 5:699–849

  6. Legmann P, Vignaux O, Dousset B, Baraza AJ, Palazzo L, Dumontier I, Coste J, Louvel A, Roseau G, Couturier D, Bonnin A (1998) Pancreatic tumors: comparison of dual-phase helical CT and endoscopic sonography. Am J Roentgenol 170:1315–1322

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Akahoshi K, Chijiiwa Y, Nakano I, Nawata H, Ogawa Y, Tanaka M, Nagai E, Tsuneyoshi M (1998) Diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer by endoscopic ultrasound. Brit J Radiol 71:492–496

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cannon ME, Carpenter SL, Elta GH, Nostrant TT, Kochman ML, Ginsberg GG, Stotland B, Rosato EF, Morris JB, Eckhauser F, Scheiman JM (1999) EUS compared with CT, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography and the influence of biliary stenting on staging accuracy of ampullary neoplasms. Gastrointest Endosc 50:27–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ahmad NA, Lewis JD, Ginsberg GG, Rosato EF, Morris JB, Kochman ML (2000) Endoscopic ultrasound in preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 52:463–468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Meining A, Dittler HJ, Wolf A, Lorenz R, Schusdziarra V, Siewert JR, Classen M, Hofler H, Rosch T (2002) You get what you expect? A critical appraisal of imaging methodology in endosonographic cancer staging. Gut 50:599–603

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Soriano A, Castells A, Ayuso C, Ayuso JR, de Caralt MT, Gines MA, Real MI, Gilabert R, Quinto L, Trilla A, Feu F, Montanya X, Fernandez-Cruz L, Navarro S (2004) Preoperative staging and tumor resectability assessment of pancreatic cancer: prospective study comparing endoscopic ultrasonography, helical computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography. Am J Gastroenterol 99:492–501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Eloubeidi MA, Chen VK, Eltoum IA, Jhala D, Chhieng DC, Jhala N, Vickers SM, Wilcox CM (2003) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer: diagnostic accuracy and acute and 30-day complications. Am J Gastroenterol 98:2663–2668

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rösch T, Braig C, Gain T, Feuerbach S, Siewert JR, Schusdziarra V, Classen M (1992) Staging of pancreatic and ampullary carcinoma by endoscopic ultrasonography. Comparison with conventional sonography, computed tomography, and angiography. Gastroenterology 102:188–199

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hocke M, Schulze E, Gottschalk P, Topalidis T, Dietrich CF (2006) Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between focal pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 12:246–250

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Aslanian H, Salem R, Lee J, Andersen D, Robert M, Topazian M (2005) EUS diagnosis of vascular invasion in pancreatic cancer: surgical and histologic correlates. Am J Gastroenterol 100:1381–1385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fritscher-Ravens A, Knoefel WT, Krause C, Swain CP, Brandt L, Patel K (2005) Three-dimensional linear endoscopic ultrasound—feasibility of a novel technique applied for the detection of vessel involvement of pancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol 100:1296–1302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahmad NA, Kochman ML, Brensinger C, Brugge WR, Faigel DO, Gress FG, Kimmey MB, Nickl NJ, Savides TJ, Wallace MB, Wiersema MJ, Ginsberg GG (2003) Interobserver agreement among endosonographers for the diagnosis of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic pancreatic cystic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 58:59–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Meining A, Rosch T, Wolf A, Lorenz R, Allescher HD, Kauer W, Dittler HJ (2003) High interobserver variability in endosonographic staging of upper gastrointestinal cancers. Z Gastroenterol 41:391–394

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bhutani MS, Gress FG, Giovannini M, Erickson RA, Catalano MF, Chak A, Deprez PH, Faigel DO, Nguyen CC (2004) The no endosonographic detection of tumor (NEST) study: a case series of pancreatic cancers missed on endoscopic ultrasonography. No Endosonographic Detection of Tumor (NEST) Study Endoscopy 36:385–389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Catanzaro A, Richardson S, Veloso H, Isenberg GA, Wong RC, Sivak MV Jr, Chak A (2003) Long-term follow-up of patients with clinically indeterminate suspicion of pancreatic cancer and normal EUS. Gastrointest Endosc 58:836–840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Klapman JB, Chang KJ, Lee JG, Nguyen P (2005) Negative predictive value of endoscopic ultrasound in a large series of patients with a clinical suspicion of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 100:2658–2661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Furukawa H, Okada S, Saisho H, Ariyama J, Karasawa E, Nakaizumi A, Nakazawa S, Murakami K, Kakizoe T (1996) Clinicopathologic features of small pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a collective study. Cancer 78:986–990

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Canto MI, Goggins M, Yeo CJ, Griffin C, Axilbund JE, Brune K, Ali SZ, Jagannath S, Petersen GM, Fishman EK, Piantadosi S, Giardiello FM, Hruban RH (2004) Screening for pancreatic neoplasia in high-risk individuals: an EUS-based approach. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2:606–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Canto MI, Goggins M, Hruban RH, Petersen GM, Giardiello FM, Yeo C, Fishman EK, Brune K, Axilbund J, Griffin C, Ali S, Richman J, Jagannath S, Kantsevoy SV, Kalloo AN (2006) Screening for early pancreatic neoplasia in high-risk individuals: a prospective controlled study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 4:766–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Department C, Klinikum Ludwigshafen gGmbH, Academic Hospital of the Johannes Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Bremserstrasse 79, 67063, Ludwigshafen, Germany

    Lars Helmstaedter & Juergen Ferdinand Riemann

Authors
  1. Lars Helmstaedter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juergen Ferdinand Riemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juergen Ferdinand Riemann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Helmstaedter, L., Riemann, J.F. Pancreatic cancer—EUS and early diagnosis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393, 923–927 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-007-0275-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-007-0275-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation