Seicean A. Endoscopic ultrasound in chronic pancreatitis: Where are we now? World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16(34): 4253-4263 [PMID: 20818808 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i34.4253]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Andrada Seicean, MD, PhD, Third Medical Clinic, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, Croitorilor Street 19-21, 400162 Cluj-Napoca, Romania. andradaseicean@yahoo.com
Article-Type of This Article
Editorial
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Table 2 Correspondence between standard endoscopic ultrasonography criteria and pathologic features in chronic pancreatitis (adapted from Sahai AV 2002[21])
Standard EUS criteria
Pathologic features
Parenchymal criteria
Hyperechoic foci
Small calcifications
Hyperechoic strands
Fibrosis
Lobularity
Edema or fibrosis
Cysts
Pseudocysts
Calcifications
Calcifications
Ductal criteria
MPD dilatation
MPD dilatation
MPD irregularity
MPD irregular
Hyperechoic MPD walls
Ductal fibrosis or edema
Visible side branches
Dilated secondary branches
Table 3 Rosemont consensus definitions
Rank
Features
Definition
Location
Parenchymal features
1
Major A
Hyperechoic foci with shadowing
Echogenic structures ≥ 2 mm in length and width that shadow
Body and tail only
2
Major B
Lobularity with honeycombing
Well-circumscribed, ≥ 5 mm structures with enhancing rims and relatively echo-poor centers, with ≥ 3 lobules
Body and tail only
Minor
Lobularity with honeycombing
Well-circumscribed, ≥ 5 mm structures with enhancing rims and relatively echo-poor centers, with non-contiguous lobules
Body and tail only
3
Minor
Hyperechoic foci without shadowing
Echogenic structures ≥ 2 mm in length and width with no shadowing
Body and tail only
4
Minor
Cysts
Anechoic, rounded/elliptical structures with or without septations
Head, body and tail only
5
Minor
Stranding
Hyperechoic lines ≥ 3 mm in length in at least two different directions with respect to the imaged plane
Body and tail only
Ductal features
1
Major A
MPD calculi
Echogenic structures within the MPD with acoustic shadowing
Head, body and tail only
2
Minor
Irregularity of MPD contour
Uneven or irregular outline and ectatic course
Body and tail only
3
Minor
Dilated side branches
3 or more tubular anechoic structures each measuring ≥ 1 mm in width, budding from MPD
Body and tail only
4
Minor
MPD dilation
≥ 3.5 mm in body or > 1.5 mm in tail
Body and tail only
5
Minor
Hyperechoic duct margin
Echogenic, distinct structure greater than 50%of the entire MPD
Body and tail only
Table 4 Rosemont diagnostic stratification
Stratum
Criteria
Consistent with CP
1 major feature A + ≥ 3 minor features
1 major feature A + major feature B
2 major feature
Suggestive of CP
1 major feature A + < 3 minor features
1 major feature B + ≥ 3 minor features
≥ 5 minor features (any)
Indeterminate for CP
3 or 4 minor features major feature B alone or with < 3 minor features