Top

European Radiology

Published in:

Open Access 01-09-2017 | Gastrointestinal

Diagnostic performance of imaging modalities in chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Y. Issa, M. A. Kempeneers, H. C. van Santvoort, T. L. Bollen, S. Bipat, M. A. Boermeester

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 9/2017

Abstract

Objectives

Obtain summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for imaging modalities for chronic pancreatitis (CP) assessment.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases for studies evaluating imaging modalities for the diagnosis of CP up to September 2016. A bivariate random-effects modeling was used to obtain summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity.

Results

We included 43 studies evaluating 3460 patients. Sensitivity of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (82%; 95%CI: 76%-87%) was significant higher than that of abdominal ultrasonography (US) (67%; 95%CI: 53%-78%; P=0.018). The sensitivity estimates of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography (CT) were 81% (95%CI: 70%-89%), 78% (95%CI: 69%-85%), and 75% (95%CI: 66%-83%), respectively, and did not differ significantly from each other. Estimates of specificity were comparable for EUS (90%; 95%CI: 82%-95%), ERCP (94%; 95%CI: 87%-98%), CT (91%; 95% CI: 81%-96%), MRI (96%; 95%CI: 90%-98%), and US (98%; 95%CI: 89%-100%).

Conclusions

EUS, ERCP, MRI and CT all have comparable high diagnostic accuracy in the initial diagnosis of CP. EUS and ERCP are outperformers and US has the lowest accuracy. The choice of imaging modality can therefore be made based on invasiveness, local availability, experience and costs.

Key Points

• EUS, ERCP, MRI and CT have high diagnostic sensitivity for chronic pancreatitis

• Diagnostic specificity is comparable for all imaging modalities

• EUS and ERCP are outperformers and US has the lowest accuracy

• The choice of imaging can be made based on clinical considerations

Available only for authorised users

Gardner TB, Kennedy AT, Gelrud A et al (2010) Chronic pancreatitis and its effect on employment and health care experience: results of a prospective American multicenter study. Pancreas 39:498–501CrossRefPubMed

Hall TC, Garcea G, Webb MA, Al-Leswas D, Metcalfe MS, Dennison AR (2014) The socio-economic impact of chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review. J Eval Clin Pract 20:203–207CrossRefPubMed

Mullady DK, Yadav D, Amann ST et al (2011) Type of pain, pain-associated complications, quality of life, disability and resource utilisation in chronic pancreatitis: a prospective cohort study. Gut 60:77–84CrossRefPubMed

Olesen SS, Juel J, Nielsen AK, Frokjaer JB, Wilder-Smith OH, Drewes AM (2014) Pain severity reduces life quality in chronic pancreatitis: implications for design of future outcome trials. Pancreatology 14:497–502CrossRefPubMed

Buchler MW, Martignoni ME, Friess H, Malfertheiner P (2009) A proposal for a new clinical classification of chronic pancreatitis. BMC Gastroenterol 9:93CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Schneider A, Lohr JM, Singer MV (2007) The M-ANNHEIM classification of chronic pancreatitis: introduction of a unifying classification system based on a review of previous classifications of the disease. J Gastroenterol 42:101–119CrossRefPubMed

Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME et al (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 155:529–536CrossRefPubMed

Brozek JL, Akl EA, Jaeschke R et al (2009) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 2 of 3 The GRADE approach to grading quality of evidence about diagnostic tests and strategies. Allergy 64:1109–1116CrossRefPubMed

Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Schünemann H BJ, Guyatt G, Oxman A (2013) Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. The GRADE Working Group; 2013. Available at: www.guidelinedevelopment.org/handbook. Accessed 28 Jan 2015

11.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH (2005) Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 58:982–990CrossRefPubMed

13.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151:W264CrossRef

14.

Adamek HE, Albert J, Breer H, Weitz M, Schilling D, Riemann JF (2000) Pancreatic cancer detection with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a prospective controlled study. Lancet 356:190–193CrossRefPubMed

15.

Albashir S, Bronner MP, Parsi MA, Walsh RM, Stevens T (2010) Endoscopic ultrasound, secretin endoscopic pancreatic function test, and histology: correlation in chronic pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol 105:2498–2503CrossRefPubMed

16.

Alcaraz MJ, De la Morena EJ, Polo A, Ramos A, De la Cal MA, Gonzalez MA (2000) A comparative study of magnetic resonance cholangiography and direct cholangiography. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 92:427–438PubMed

17.

Balci NC, Alkaade S, Akduman IE, Bilgin M, Murdock CP, Burton FR (2006) Serial contrast-enhanced MRI of the pancreas. Correlation with secretin-stimulated endoscopic pancreatic function test. Acad Radiol 13:1367–1372CrossRefPubMed

18.

Bolog N, Constantinescu G, Oancea I et al (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging of bile and pancreatic ducts: a retrospective study. Rom J Gastroenterol 13:91–97PubMed

19.

Brand B, Pfaff T, Binmoeller KF et al (2000) Endoscopic ultrasound for differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic lesions, confirmed by surgery. Scand J Gastroenterol 35:1221–1228CrossRefPubMed

20.

Buscail L, Escourrou J, Moreau J et al (1995) Endoscopic ultrasonography in chronic pancreatitis: a comparative prospective study with conventional ultrasonography, computed tomography, and ERCP. Pancreas 10:251–257CrossRefPubMed

21.

Catalano MF, Geenen JE (1998) Diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis by endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopy 30:A111–A115CrossRefPubMed

22.

Chong AK, Hawes RH, Hoffman BJ, Adams DB, Lewin DN, Romagnuolo J (2007) Diagnostic performance of EUS for chronic pancreatitis: a comparison with histopathology. Gastrointest Endosc 65:808–814CrossRefPubMed

23.

Conwell DL, Zuccaro G, Purich E et al (2007) Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound chronic pancreatitis criteria to the endoscopic secretin-stimulated pancreatic function test. Dig Dis Sci 52:1206–1210CrossRefPubMed

24.

Dramaix JP, Sahel J, Corbeau A (1980) A prospective comparative study of different methods of morphological examination of the pancreas. Place of ultrasonography and computerized tomography. Acta Endoscopica 10:1CrossRef

25.

Fusari M, Maurea S, Imbriaco M et al (2010) Comparison between multislice CT and MR imaging in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with pancreatic masses. Radiol Med 115:453–466CrossRefPubMed

26.

Gebel M, Stiehl M, Freise J (1985) Value of ultrasonographic imaging of the pancreas for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis and pancreas carcinoma in comparison with ERP. Ultraschall in der Medizin 6:127–130

27.

Giovannini M, Seitz JF (1994) Endoscopic ultrasonography with a linear-type echoendoscope in the evaluation of 94 patients with pancreatobiliary disease. Endoscopy 26:579–585CrossRefPubMed

28.

Glasbrenner B, Schwarz M, Pauls S, Preclik G, Beger HG, Adler G (2000) Prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the preoperative assessment of masses in the pancreatic head. Dig Surg 17:468–474CrossRefPubMed

29.

Gmelin E, Weiss H-D, Fuchs H-D, Reiser M (1981) A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, computer tomography and ERPC in chronic pancreatitis and carcinoma of the pancreas. Röfo 134:136–141PubMed

30.

Hellerhoff KJ, Helmberger IH, Rosch T, Settles MR, Link TM, Rummeny EJ (2002) Dynamic MR pancreatography after secretin administration: image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Am J Roentgenol 179:121–129CrossRef

31.

Imdahl A, Nitzsche E, Krautmann F et al (1999) Evaluation of positron emission tomography with 2- [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose for the differentiation of chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg 86:194–199CrossRefPubMed

32.

Kremer H, Kellner E, Schierl W, Schumm C, Weidenhiller S, Zollner N (1977) Echographic diagnosis of the pancreas. Catamnesis of 481 cases (author's transl). MMW MunchMed Wochenschr 119:1449–1452

33.

Lammer J, Lepuschutz H, Sager WD, Kratochvil P, Brandstatter G, Zalaudek G (1980) Endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreaticography (ERCP) and computer tomography in the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis, pseudocysts and carcinoma of the pancreas--a comparison (author's transl). Rontgenblatter 33:602–611PubMed

34.

Lawson TL, Irani SK, Stock M (1978) Detection of pancreatic pathology by ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Radiol 3:335–341CrossRefPubMed

35.

Lees WR, Vallon AG, Denyer ME et al (1979) Prospective study of ultrasonography in chronic pancreatic disease. Br Med J 1:162–164CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Lin JT, Wang JT, Wang TH (1989) The diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography in pancreatic disorders. Taiwan Yi Xue Hui Za Zhi 88:483–487PubMed

37.

Nattermann C, Goldschmidt AJW, Dancygier H (1993) Endosonography in chronic pancreatitis - a comparison between endoscopic retrograde pancreatography and endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopy 25:565–570CrossRefPubMed

38.

Pamos S, Rivera P, Canelles P et al (1998) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): diagnostic usefulness. Gastroenterol Hepatol 21:174–180PubMed

39.

Parsi MA, Conwell DL, Zuccaro G et al (2008) Findings on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and pancreatic function test in suspected chronic pancreatitis and negative cross-sectional imaging. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 6:1432–1436CrossRefPubMed

40.

Pistolesi GF, Procacci C, Fugazzola C (1981) Place of computed tomography in pancreatic disease. Comparison with other radiological methods. Comput Tomogr 5:115–137CrossRefPubMed

41.

Pungpapong S, Noh KW, Woodward TA, Wallace MB, Al-Haddad M, Raimondo M (2007) Endoscopic ultrasound and IL-8 in pancreatic juice to diagnose chronic pancreatitis. Pancreatology 7:491–496CrossRefPubMed

42.

Pungpapong S, Wallace MB, Woodward TA, Noh KW, Raimondo M (2007) Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: a prospective comparison study. J Clin Gastroenterol 41:88–93CrossRefPubMed

43.

Rudowicz-Pietruszewska B, Sasiadek M, Jamrozik-Kruk Z (2002) MRCP with mid-field unit versus ERCP - comparison of 88 cases. Gastroenterol Pol 9:51–58

44.

Sai JK, Suyama M, Kubokawa Y, Watanabe S (2008) Diagnosis of mild chronic pancreatitis (Cambridge classification): comparative study using secretin injection-magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. World J Gastroenterol 14:1218–1221CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Savarino V, Mansi C, Macchia G (1980) Computed tomography in the diagnosis of pancreatic diseases. Ital J Gastroenterol 12:265–269

46.

Scarabino T, Petronelli S, Palladino D et al (1989) ERCP in the diagnosis of bilio-pancreatic pathology. Comparison with echography and CT. Radiol Med 77:650–654PubMed

47.

Schlaudraff E, Wagner H-J, Klose KJ, Heverhagen JT (2008) Prospective evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of secretin-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography in suspected chronic pancreatitis. Magn Reson Imaging 26:1367–1373CrossRefPubMed

48.

Stevens T, Zuccaro G, Dumot JA et al (2009) Prospective comparison of radial and linear endoscopic ultrasound for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopy 41:836–841CrossRefPubMed

49.

Sverko A, Tripalo-Batos A, Marotti M, Mustapic M, Beslin MB, Kruslin B (2011) Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology in differentiation of pancreatic diseases. Acta Clin Croat 50:137–144PubMed

50.

Swobodnik W, Meyer W, Brecht KD (1983) Ultrasound, computed tomography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the morphologic diagnosis of pancreatic disease. Klin Wochenschr 61:291–296CrossRefPubMed

51.

Tox U, Hackenberg R, Stelzer A et al (2007) Endosonographic diagnosis of solid pancreatic tumors: a retrospective analysis from a tertiary referral center. Z Gastroenterol 45:307–312CrossRefPubMed

52.

Triller J, Voegeli E, Halter F (1975) Selective pancreatic angiography and retrograde pancreatic cholangiography as a combined examination. Röfo 122:138–144PubMed

53.

Wiersema MJ, Hawes RH, Lehman GA, Kochman ML, Sherman S, Kopecky KK (1993) Prospective evaluation of endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with chronic abdominal pain of suspected pancreatic origin. Endoscopy 25:555–564CrossRefPubMed

54.

Zhang XM, Shi H, Parker L, Dohke M, Holland GA, Mitchell DG (2003) Suspected early or mild chronic pancreatitis: enhancement patterns on gadolinium chelate dynamic MRI. Magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 17:86–94CrossRefPubMed

55.

Zuccaro P, Stevens T, Repas K et al (2009) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography reports in the evaluation of chronic pancreatitis: a need for quality improvement. Pancreatology 9:764–769CrossRefPubMed

56.

Trikudanathan G, Vega-Peralta J, Malli A et al (2016) Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for non-calcific chronic pancreatitis (NCCP) based on histopathology. Am J Gastroenterol 111:568–574CrossRefPubMed

57.

Delhaye M, Van SW, Cesmeli E et al (2014) Belgian consensus on chronic pancreatitis in adults and children: statements on diagnosis and nutritional, medical, and surgical treatment. Acta Gastroenterol Belg 77:47–65PubMed

58.

Frulloni L, Falconi M, Gabbrielli A et al (2010) Italian consensus guidelines for chronic pancreatitis. Dig Liver Dis 42:S381–S406CrossRefPubMed

59.

Martinez J, Abad-Gonzalez A, Aparicio JR et al (2013) The Spanish Pancreatic Club recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis: part 1 (diagnosis). Pancreatology 13:8–17CrossRefPubMed

60.

Schreyer AG, Jung M, Riemann JF et al (2014) S3 guideline for chronic pancreatitis - diagnosis, classification and therapy for the radiologist. Röfo 186:1002–1008PubMed

61.

Remedios D, Hierath M, Ashford N et al (2014) Imaging referral guidelines in Europe: now and in the future-EC Referral Guidelines Workshop Proceedings. Insights Imaging 5:9–13CrossRefPubMed

62.

Remedios D, Hierath M, Ashford N et al (2014) European survey on imaging referral guidelines. Insights Imaging 5:15–23CrossRefPubMed

63.

Remedios DCP, Ashford N, Grenier P (2014) Referral guidelines for medical imaging - availability and use in the European Union. European Union. doi:10.2833/18118

64.

Clave P, Boadas J, Gonzalez-Carro P et al (1999) Accuracy of imaging techniques and tumor markers in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Gastroenterol Hepatol 22:335–341PubMed

65.

Orti E, Canelles P, Tome A et al (1993) Diagnostic value of aspiration cytology with ERCP. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 84:173–177PubMed

66.

Wang LW, Li ZS, Li SD, Jin ZD, Zou DW, Chen F (2009) Prevalence and clinical features of chronic pancreatitis in China: a retrospective multicenter analysis over 10 years. Pancreas 38:248–254CrossRefPubMed

67.

Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G et al (2007) Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol 102:1781–1788CrossRefPubMed

68.

Barthet M, Lesavre N, Desjeux A et al (2002) Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: results from a single tertiary referral center. Endoscopy 34:991–997CrossRefPubMed

69.

Cotton PB, Garrow DA, Gallagher J, Romagnuolo J (2009) Risk factors for complications after ERCP: a multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years. Gastrointest Endosc 70:80–88CrossRefPubMed

70.

Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ (2007) Radiologic assessment of acute and chronic pancreatitis. Surg Clin North Am 87:1341–1358CrossRefPubMed

71.

Matos C, Bali MA, Delhaye M, Deviere J (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of pancreatitis and pancreatic neoplasms. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 20:157–178CrossRefPubMed

72.

Remer EM, Baker ME (2002) Imaging of chronic pancreatitis. Radiol Clin North Am 40:1229–1242CrossRefPubMed

73.

Ly JN, Miller FH (2002) MR imaging of the pancreas: a practical approach. Radiol Clin North Am 40:1289–1306CrossRefPubMed

74.

Robinson PJA, Sheridan MB (2000) Pancreatitis: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 10:401–408CrossRefPubMed

75.

Ahmed Ali U, Nieuwenhuijs VB, van Eijck CH et al (2012) Clinical outcome in relation to timing of surgery in chronic pancreatitis: a nomogram to predict pain relief. Arch Surg 147:925–932PubMed

76.

Ahmed Ali U, Issa Y, Bruno MJ et al (2013) Early surgery versus optimal current step-up practice for chronic pancreatitis (ESCAPE): design and rationale of a randomized trial. BMC Gastroenterol 13:49CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Diagnostic performance of imaging modalities in chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Y. Issa
M. A. Kempeneers
H. C. van Santvoort
T. L. Bollen
S. Bipat
M. A. Boermeester
Publication date: 01-09-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 9/2017
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4720-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Diagnostic performance of imaging modalities in chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2017

High b-value diffusion-weighted imaging in progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in HIV patients

Digital subtraction CT angiography for the detection of posterior inferior cerebellar artery aneurysms: comparison with digital subtraction angiography

Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging pharmacokinetic parameters as predictors of treatment response of brain metastases in patients with lung cancer

A novel representation of inter-site tumour heterogeneity from pre-treatment computed tomography textures classifies ovarian cancers by clinical outcome

A multiparametric automatic method to monitor long-term reproducibility in digital mammography: results from a regional screening programme

Microwave ablation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma that met up-to-seven criteria: feasibility, local efficacy and long-term outcomes