Cited by 149Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchNeuroendocrine Tumor Research AdvancesPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of pancreas

Open access
Machado, NormanOneil, al Qadhi, Hani, al Wahibi, Khalifa·2015·North American Journal of Medical Sciences

Abstract

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) of the pancreas are neoplasms that are characterized by ductal dilation, intraductal papillary growth, and thick mucus secretion. This relatively recently defined pathology is evolving in terms of its etiopathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, management, and treatment guidelines. A PubMed database search was performed. All the relevant abstracts in English language were reviewed and the articles in which cases of IPMN could be identified were further scrutinized. Information of IPMN was derived, and duplication of information in several articles and those with areas of persisting uncertainties were excluded. The recent consensus guidelines were examined. The reported incidence of malignancy varies from 57% to 92% in the main duct-IPMN (MD-IPMN) and from 6% to 46% in the branch duct-IPMN (BD-IPMN). The features of high-risk malignant lesions that raise concern include obstructive jaundice in a patient with a cystic lesion in the pancreatic head, the findings on radiological imaging of a mass lesion of >30 mm, enhanced solid component, and the main pancreatic duct (MPD) of size ≥10 mm; while duct size 5-9 mm and cyst size <3 mm are considered as "worrisome features." Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are primary investigations in diagnosing and following up on these patients. The role of pancreatoscopy and the analysis of aspirated cystic fluid for cytology and DNA analysis is still to be established. In general, resection is recommended for most MD-IPMN, mixed variant, and symptomatic BD-IPMN. The 5-year survival of patients after surgical resection for noninvasive IPMN is reported to be at 77-100%, while for those with invasive carcinoma, it is significantly lower at 27-60%. The follow-up of these patients could vary from 6 months to 1 year and would depend on the risk stratification for invasive malignancy and the pathology of the resected specimen. The understanding of IPMN has evolved over the years. The recent guidelines have played a role in this regard.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4103/1947-2714.157477

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 100 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [11]Inoue H Tsuchida A Kawasaki Y Fujimoto Y Yamasaki S Kajiyama G Preoperative diagnosis of intraductal papillary-mucinous tumors of the pancreas with attention to telomerase activity Cancer 2001 91 35 41 11148557
  2. [19]Furuta K Watanabe H Ikeda S Differences between solid and duct-ectatic types of pancreatic ductal carcinomas Cancer 1992 69 1327 33 1540869
  3. [29]Longnecker DS Observations on the etiology and pathogenesis of intraductal papillary-mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas Hepatogastroenterology 1998 45 1973 80 9951850
  4. [36]Maeshiro K Nakayama Y Yasunami Y Furuta K Ikeda S Diagnosis of mucin-producing tumour of the pancreas by balloon-catheter endoscopic retrograde pancreatography - compression study Hepatogastroenterology 1998 45 1986 95 9951852
  5. [73]Takeyoshi I Ohwada S Nakamura S Ogawa T Kawashima Y Ikeya T Segmental pancreatectomy for mucin-producing pancreatic tumors Hepatogastroenterology 1999 46 2585 8 10522046

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Machado, N., al Qadhi, H., & al Wahibi, K.
Venue
North American Journal of Medical Sciences
Publisher
Medknow
Published
2015
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
160
ISSN
1947-2714 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1660506500
Cited by
149
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • North American Journal of Medical Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Neuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Keywords
intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, main duct IPMN, branch duct IPMN, malignant transformation, risk stratification, pancreatic cysts, magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasound, pancreatoscopy, surgical resection, postoperative follow-up

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