Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2019.
World J Gastroenterol. May 14, 2019; 25(18): 2217-2228
Published online May 14, 2019. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i18.2217
Table 1 Patient characteristics
Characteristics
Number of patients200
Baseline total PCN261
Multiple PNC patients, n (%)51 (25)
Sex ratio, M:F62:138
Age in yr, mean ± SD67 ± 14
Main duct diameter in mm, median (range)2.6 (1.8-4.0)
Cystic size in mm, mean ± SD16 ± 13
PNC < 10 mm, n (%)97 (37)
Location, uncinate process, n (%)73 (28)
Location, pancreatic head, n (%)106 (40)
Location, pancreatic body, n (%)54 (21)
Location, pancreatic tail, n (%)28 (11)
Radiologically suspected IPMN, n (%)148 (74)
Mean follow-up, mo (± SD)25.1 (± 18.2)
Surgery during follow-up, n (%)2 (1)

  • Citation: Morelli L, Guadagni S, Borrelli V, Pisano R, Di Franco G, Palmeri M, Furbetta N, Gambaccini D, Marchi S, Boraschi P, Bastiani L, Campatelli A, Mosca F, Di Candio G. Role of abdominal ultrasound for the surveillance follow-up of pancreatic cystic neoplasms: a cost-effective safe alternative to the routine use of magnetic resonance imaging. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25(18): 2217-2228
  • URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v25/i18/2217.htm
  • DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i18.2217