Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Head-to-Head Comparison

Abstract

Purpose Computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging modality for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP), but advances in transabdominal ultrasound (US) technology have given US a position as a viable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT and pancreatic US compared to the reference standard, a modified Mayo score.

Materials and Methods CT, US, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were performed in patients referred due to suspected CP. The modified Mayo score included EUS results, clinical presentation, and results from exocrine and endocrine pancreatic function tests. We scored CT findings according to the modified Cambridge classification and US findings according to the Rosemont classification.

Results In total, 73 patients were included. 53 patients (73%) were categorized as CP and 20 (27%) as non-CP. CT and US yielded similar sensitivities (68% and 64%, respectively) and specificities (75 and 85%, respectively) and similar areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnosing CP. We found no significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for CT (AUROC 0.75, 95% CI 0.63–0.87) and US (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.71–0.91).

Conclusion We conclude that CT and US had comparable, moderate accuracy in diagnosing CP. Neither modality had high enough sensitivity to exclude the diagnosis as a standalone method.

Key words

chronic pancreatitis - CT  - pancreas  - pancreatitis - ultrasound

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 05. März 2021
Eingereicht: 02. Juni 2021

Angenommen: 19. Juni 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
24. August 2021

• References

• 1 Lohr JM, Dominguez-Munoz E, Rosendahl J, Besselink M, Mayerle J, Lerch MM. et al United European Gastroenterology evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and therapy of chronic pancreatitis (HaPanEU). United European Gastroenterol J. 2017; 5: 153-199
• 2 Hoffmeister A, Mayerle J, Beglinger C, Buchler MW, Bufler P, Dathe K. et al English language version of the S3-consensus guidelines on chronic pancreatitis: Definition, aetiology, diagnostic examinations, medical, endoscopic and surgical management of chronic pancreatitis. Z Gastroenterol. 2015; 53: 1447-1495
• 3 Kleeff J, Whitcomb DC, Shimosegawa T, Esposito I, Lerch MM, Gress T. et al Chronic pancreatitis. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017; 3: 17060
• 4 Beyer G, Habtezion A, Werner J, Lerch MM, Mayerle J. Chronic pancreatitis. Lancet. 2020; 396: 499-512
• 5 Gardner TB, Adler DG, Forsmark CE, Sauer BG, Taylor JR, Whitcomb DC. ACG Clinical Guideline: Chronic Pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020; 115: 322-339
• 6 Frokjaer JB, Akisik F, Farooq A, Akpinar B, Dasyam A, Drewes AM. et al Guidelines for the Diagnostic Cross Sectional Imaging and Severity Scoring of Chronic Pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2018; 18: 764-773
• 7 Layer P, Yamamoto H, Kalthoff L, Clain JE, Bakken LJ, DiMagno EP. The different courses of early- and late-onset idiopathic and alcoholic chronic pancreatitis. Gastroenterology. 1994; 107: 1481-1487
• 8 Schneider A, Lohr JM, Singer MV. 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. 2007; 42: 101-119
• 9 Buchler MW, Martignoni ME, Friess H, Malfertheiner P. A proposal for a new clinical classification of chronic pancreatitis. BMC Gastroenterol. 2009; 9: 93
• 10 Bagul ASA. Evaluation of the Manchester classification system for chronic pancreatitis. JOP. 2006; 390-396
• 11 Lankisch PG, Assmus C, Maisonneuve P, Lowenfels AB. Epidemiology of pancreatic diseases in Luneburg County. A study in a defined german population. Pancreatology. 2002; 2: 469-477
• 12 Conwell DL, Lee LS, Yadav D, Longnecker DS, Miller FH, Mortele KJ. et al American Pancreatic Association Practice Guidelines in Chronic Pancreatitis: evidence-based report on diagnostic guidelines. Pancreas. 2014; 43: 1143-1162
• 13 Dasyam AK, Vipperla K, Slivka A, Gong T, Papachristou GI, Whitcomb DC. et al Computed tomography based scoring system in a prospectively ascertained cohort of patients with chronic pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2019; 19: 1027-1033
• 14 Sarner M, Cotton PB. Classification of pancreatitis. Gut. 1984; 25: 756-759
• 15 Schreyer AG, Jung M, Riemann JF, Niessen C, Pregler B, Grenacher L. et al S3 guideline for chronic pancreatitis-diagnosis, classification and therapy for the radiologist. Rofo. 2014; 186: 1002-1008
• 16 Catalano MF, Sahai A, Levy M, Romagnuolo J, Wiersema M, Brugge W. et al EUS-based criteria for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: the Rosemont classification. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 1251-1261
• 17 Stevens T, Lopez R, Adler DG, Al-Haddad MA, Conway J, Dewitt JM. et al Multicenter comparison of the interobserver agreement of standard EUS scoring and Rosemont classification scoring for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71: 519-526
• 18 Whitsett M. Ultrasound Imaging and Advances in System Features. Ultrasound Clinics. 2009; 4: 391-401
• 19 Engjom T, Sangnes DA, Havre RF, Erchinger F, Pham KD, Haldorsen IS. et al Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal Ultrasound in Chronic Pancreatitis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2017; 43: 735-743
• 20 Nordaas IK, Dimcevski G, Gilja OH, Havre RF, Haldorsen IS, Engjom T. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography scores in chronic pancreatitis. Pancreas. 2021: (in press)
• 21 Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Altman DG, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Hooft L. et al STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open. 2016; 6: e012799
• 22 Issa Y, Kempeneers MA, van Santvoort HC, Bollen TL, Bipat S, Boermeester MA. Diagnostic performance of imaging modalities in chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2017; 27: 3820-3844
• 23 Buscail L, Escourrou J, Moreau J, Delvaux M, Louvel D, Lapeyre F. et al Endoscopic ultrasonography in chronic pancreatitis: a comparative prospective study with conventional ultrasonography, computed tomography, and ERCP. Pancreas. 1995; 10: 251-257
• 24 Swobodnik W, Meyer W, Brecht-Kraus D, Wechsler JG, Geiger S, Malfertheiner P. et al Ultrasound, computed tomography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the morphologic diagnosis of pancreatic disease. Klin Wochenschr. 1983; 61: 291-296
• 25 Pistolesi GF, Procacci C, Fugazzola C, Marzoli GP, Pederzoli P, Quarta Colosso P. Place of computed tomography in pancreatic disease. Comparison with other radiological methods. Comput Tomogr 1981; 5: 115-137
• 26 Almeida RR, Lo GC, Patino M, Bizzo B, Canellas R, Sahani DV. Advances in Pancreatic CT Imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018; 211: 52-66
• 27 Engjom T, Pham KD, Erchinger F, Haldorsen IS, Gilja OH, Dimcevski G. et al Good Agreement Between Transabdominal and Endoscopic Ultrasound of the Pancreas in Chronic Pancreatitis. Ultraschall in Med. 2018
• 28 Pagliari D, Ainora ME, Brizi MG, Cintoni M, Rinninella E, Attili F. et al A new ultrasound score for the assessment and follow-up of chronic pancreatitis: The 'Gemelli USCP score'. Dig Liver Dis. 2020; 52: 644-650
• 29 Tanaka S, Fukuda J, Nakao M, Ioka T, Ashida R, Takakura R. et al Effectiveness of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography for the Characterization of Small and Early Stage Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2020; 46: 2245-2253
• 30 Dietrich CF, Hocke M. Elastography of the Pancreas, Current View. Clin Endosc. 2019; 52: 533-540