diagnostic difficulties and therapeutic choices in intrapancreatic accessory spleen: case reports
Clicks: 249
ID: 229660
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
249 views
24 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #6 of 7 articles by views in jurnal visi komunikasi
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Marco Massani,1 Paola Maccatrozzo,1 Giovanni Morana,2 Luca Fabris,3 Cesare Ruffolo,1 Luca Bonariol,1 Bruno Pauletti,1 Nicolò Bassi1 1IV Department of Surgery, Regional Center for HPB Surgery, 2Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Regional Hospital of Treviso, Treviso, 3Molecular Medicine Department, University Hospital, Padua, Italy Introduction: Accessory spleen has a worldwide prevalence of 10%–30% and is defined as intrapancreatic accessory spleen (IPAS) when it locates within the pancreas. This occasional finding can raise difficulties in differential diagnosis with hypervascular pancreatic lesions, such as pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Presentation of cases: We present five cases in which a mass of the pancreatic tail was found on radiologic investigations. The first case was a young female patient who underwent a distal pancreatectomy because of a mass of the pancreatic tail misdiagnosed as a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor due to its radiologic features on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (small, ovoidal, and well defined). Misdiagnosis also occurred in the second case, in which an 82-year-old woman was referred to our hospital because of a pancreatic mass of uncertain diagnosis. She also underwent an operation, and pathologic examination showed splenic parenchyma. A correct diagnosis was achieved in the remaining three cases that are still under radiologic monitoring. Discussion: IPAS is a benign entity and therefore does not require surgical treatment. We discuss the best diagnostic options that have recently been experienced, focusing on diffusion-weighted and superparamagnetic iron oxide MRI, which in our experience seem to be the safest and most easily accessible diagnostic tools. Conclusion: We suggest that a multidisciplinary approach should guide the diagnosis. When a pancreatic mass with specific features (round, ovoid, and well defined) is detected by computed tomography or MRI, an IPAS should be suspected. Keywords: intrapancreatic accessory spleen, superparamagnetic iron oxide, diffusion-weighted images, neuroendocrine tumor, neoplasm
| Reference Key |
m2016opendiagnostic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Massani M;Maccatrozzo P;Morana G;Fabris L;Ruffolo C;Bonariol L;Pauletti B;Bassi N |
| Journal | jurnal visi komunikasi |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.