Cited by 337Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchMRI in cancer diagnosisPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment

Isoattenuating Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Multi–Detector Row CT: Secondary Signs

Prokesch, Rupert W., Chow, Lawrence C., Beaulieu, Christopher F., Bammer, Roland, Jeffrey, R. Brooke·2002·Radiology

Abstract

Purpose To assess the frequency of isoattenuating pancreatic adenocarcinoma with multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) and determine whether there are specific secondary signs that aid in detection. Materials and methods Fifty-three patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma underwent contrast material-enhanced biphasic multi-detector row CT with curved planar reformation. Tumors were initially deemed isoattenuating or hypoattenuating to normal pancreatic parenchyma on the basis of visual inspection, and the degree of attenuation was confirmed by calculating the mean attenuation differences between normal pancreatic parenchyma and tumor (tumor-pancreas contrast) during the pancreatic phase. Indirect signs of pancreatic tumor were tabulated in patients with an isoattenuating tumor. Results Of the 53 patients, six (11%) had isoattenuating tumors with a mean tumor-pancreas contrast of 9.25 HU +/- 11.3 during the pancreatic phase and 4.15 HU +/- 8.5 during the portal venous phase. The secondary signs of pancreatic tumor in these six patients included an interrupted pancreatic duct (n = 5), dilated biliary and pancreatic ducts (n = 1), atrophic distal pancreatic parenchyma (n = 3), and mass effect and/or convex contour abnormality (n = 3). The mean tumor-pancreas contrast for the remaining 47 patients was 74.76 HU +/- 35.61 during the pancreatic phase. Conclusion With no visible tumor-pancreas contrast for isoattenuating tumors, indirect signs such as mass effect, atrophic dist…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2243011284

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prokesch, R. W., Chow, L. C., Beaulieu, C. F., Bammer, R., & Jeffrey, R. B.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Venue
Radiology
Published
2002-09
Volume
224
Issue
3
Pages
764-768
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2097793074
Cited by
337
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 19
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › MRI in cancer diagnosis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Keywords
pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, mass effect, tumor detection, multi-detector row CT, contrast-enhanced CT
MeSH terms
Adenocarcinoma, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Tomography, X-Ray Computed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review