• Focal Cystic Pancreatic Lesions: Assessing Variation in Radiologists' Management Recommendations

    Radiology:Volume 259: Number 1-April 2011

    Ivan K. Ip, MD, MPH Koenraad J. Mortele, MD Luciano M. Prevedello, MD Ramin Khorasani, MD, MPH


    Purpose: To estimate the prevalence of focal cystic pancreatic le­sions (FCPLs) among patients undergoing computed to­mographic (CT) or magnetic resonance (MR) imaging at one institution and to examine any variation in radiolo­gists' recommendation practice pattern with regards to FCPLs.

     

    Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective HIPPA-compliant study. The requirement to obtain informed consent was waived. A cohort of patients with FCPLs was identified from radiology reports by using natural language processing. Patient-specific (ie, age, sex, symptoms, history of pancreatitis), radiologist-specific (ie, years of experience, area of expertise), and FCPL-specific (ie, size, location, septation, calcification, mural nodular­ity, pancreatic duct involvement, and presence of multiple cysts) variables were obtained. The outcome measure was whether a follow-up study was recommended. A lo­gistic regression model was used to identify relative rec­ommendation rates after controlling for key explanatory variables.

     

    Results: Between January 1 and December 31, 2009, a total of 1067 FCPLs were identified in 765 patients. Prevalence rates ranged from 2.2% at CT to 15.9% at MR imaging. Radi­ologists recommended a follow-up imaging study in 23.7% of cases of a FCPL. A 2.8-fold difference in the rate of recommendation of further imaging existed across radi­ologists after controlling for explanatory variables such as lesion-, radiologist-, and patient-specific characteristics. A history of pancreatitis was associated with a nearly two­fold decrease in recommending further imaging.

     

    Conclusion: FCPLs are common, and nearly one-quarter of radiology reports recommend at least one follow-up imaging study. Significant variation exists in the rate of recommendation for further imaging studies by radiologists, even after con­trolling for key explanatory variables.