Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, S. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, S. R.

Radiology, Vol 167, 341-344, Copyright © 1988 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Pancreatic neoplasms: how useful is evaluation with US?

JP Campbell and SR Wilson
Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, Ontario, Canada.

The usefulness of ultrasonography (US) in the evaluation of pancreatic neoplasms was assessed in 51 patients. Indications for US included jaundice (n = 19), pain (n = 16), weight loss and anorexia (n = 4), clinically palpable mass (n = 3), bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract (n = 1), and gastric outlet obstruction (n = 1). Three patients were investigated because of a previous abnormal US examination; in four the mass was an incidental observation. Sonograms were interpreted without knowledge of results from other procedures. Pancreatic masses were detected in 50 patients. Biliary and pancreatic duct obstructions were seen in 29 and 27 patients, respectively. Liver metastases were identified in 16 patients and missed in three that were not detected with either US or computed tomography. Vascular involvement was predicted in 12 patients and missed in four, while lymphadenopathy was seen in 16 and missed in five. Thirty-one cases of unresectable disease were correctly predicted with US. Resectability was not as accurately determined; only seven of 19 "resectable" lesions were successfully removed. US is an effective tool in the detection and preoperative evaluation of pancreatic malignancy.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ann. Surg. Oncol.Home page
D. E. Rivadeneira, M. Pochapin, S. R. Grobmyer, M. D. Lieberman, P. J. Christos, I. Jacobson, and J. M. Daly
Comparison of Linear Array Endoscopic Ultrasound and Helical Computed Tomography for the Staging of Periampullary Malignancies
Ann. Surg. Oncol., October 1, 2003; 10(8): 890 - 897.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
B. E. M. Van Driel, T. M. Van Gulik, P. D. J. Sturm, G. J. A. Offerhaus, D. J. Gouma, and C. J. F. Van Noorden
Differential Diagnosis of Chronic Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Cancer in Brush Cytology Specimens
Cancer Res., November 1, 1999; 59(22): 5732 - 5736.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
B.-M. Karlson, A. Ekbom, P. G. Lindgren, V. Källskog, and J. Rastad
Abdominal US for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Tumor: Prospective Cohort Analysis
Radiology, October 1, 1999; 213(1): 107 - 111.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1988 by the Radiological Society of North America.