Abstract:ObjectiveTo describe sonographic features of small(less than 5.0cm) solid pancreatic pseudopapillary tumors(SPPT) in regular check-up healthy population and to show potential value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound.MethodsRegular check-up sonographic database from 2000 to 2007 was reviewed , and six patients with a surgical pathology-proven SPPT were retrospectively studied for evaluation of sonographic appearances and features. There were 1 male and 5 females with ages from 23 to 35 years. These tumors were detected incidentally by regular check-up sonographic examination, all patients without symptoms except one patient with complaint of discomfort on the left side of the back. Contrast-enhanced sonographic examination was conducted in one patient prior to surgery.ResultsGray scale sonographic imaging features included solid homogenous hypoechoic mass in 2 cases, one of which had a hyperechoic rim, complete cystic echofree mass in 1 case, mixed solid and cystic mass in 2 cases, one of which with central hyperechoic area and one case the lesion just showed a superficial curved hyperechoic rim with posterior shadow. The size of the lesions ranged from 2.5 cm to 5.0 cm in diameter with a mean diameter of 4.2 cm. In one solid appearance tumor with contrast-enhanced imaging, the typical peripheral capsule enhancement and intra-tumor unenhanced area were evidenced in arterial phase.ConclusionsRegular check-up healthy sonographic examination can find relatively small size SPPT and allow diagnosis based on typical imaging features. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound shows greater detail of the tumor capsule and heterogeneous enhancement pattern, which are helpful for diagnosis and differentiation. ObjectiveTo describe sonographic features of small(less than 5.0cm) solid pancreatic pseudopapillary tumors(SPPT) in regular check-up healthy population and to show potential value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. To describe sonographic features of small(less than 5.0cm) solid pancreatic pseudopapillary tumors(SPPT) in regular check-up healthy population and to show potential value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. MethodsRegular check-up sonographic database from 2000 to 2007 was reviewed , and six patients with a surgical pathology-proven SPPT were retrospectively studied for evaluation of sonographic appearances and features. There were 1 male and 5 females with ages from 23 to 35 years. These tumors were detected incidentally by regular check-up sonographic examination, all patients without symptoms except one patient with complaint of discomfort on the left side of the back. Contrast-enhanced sonographic examination was conducted in one patient prior to surgery. Regular check-up sonographic database from 2000 to 2007 was reviewed , and six patients with a surgical pathology-proven SPPT were retrospectively studied for evaluation of sonographic appearances and features. There were 1 male and 5 females with ages from 23 to 35 years. These tumors were detected incidentally by regular check-up sonographic examination, all patients without symptoms except one patient with complaint of discomfort on the left side of the back. Contrast-enhanced sonographic examination was conducted in one patient prior to surgery. ResultsGray scale sonographic imaging features included solid homogenous hypoechoic mass in 2 cases, one of which had a hyperechoic rim, complete cystic echofree mass in 1 case, mixed solid and cystic mass in 2 cases, one of which with central hyperechoic area and one case the lesion just showed a superficial curved hyperechoic rim with posterior shadow. The size of the lesions ranged from 2.5 cm to 5.0 cm in diameter with a mean diameter of 4.2 cm. In one solid appearance tumor with contrast-enhanced imaging, the typical peripheral capsule enhancement and intra-tumor unenhanced area were evidenced in arterial phase. Gray scale sonographic imaging features included solid homogenous hypoechoic mass in 2 cases, one of which had a hyperechoic rim, complete cystic echofree mass in 1 case, mixed solid and cystic mass in 2 cases, one of which with central hyperechoic area and one case the lesion just showed a superficial curved hyperechoic rim with posterior shadow. The size of the lesions ranged from 2.5 cm to 5.0 cm in diameter with a mean diameter of 4.2 cm. In one solid appearance tumor with contrast-enhanced imaging, the typical peripheral capsule enhancement and intra-tumor unenhanced area were evidenced in arterial phase. ConclusionsRegular check-up healthy sonographic examination can find relatively small size SPPT and allow diagnosis based on typical imaging features. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound shows greater detail of the tumor capsule and heterogeneous enhancement pattern, which are helpful for diagnosis and differentiation. Regular check-up healthy sonographic examination can find relatively small size SPPT and allow diagnosis based on typical imaging features. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound shows greater detail of the tumor capsule and heterogeneous enhancement pattern, which are helpful for diagnosis and differentiation.

Solid Pseudopapillary Tumors of the Pancreas: Findings from Routine Screening Sonographic Examination and the Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound

Solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas: a review of 553 cases in Chinese literature.

Solid-pseudopapillary tumor of pancreas:MSCT imaging features and correlation with pathological findings

Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features of Solid Serous Cystadenomas of the Pancreas.

The value of ultrasound in detecting solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas

Contrast enhanced ultrasonography vs.contrast enhanced computed tomography for the diagnosis of focal lesions of the pancreas

Role of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor

1398: Small Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor of the Pancreas: Sonographic Features in Regular Check-Up Healthy Population and the Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound

Heterotopic Accessory Spleen with Squamous Epithelial Cyst in Pancreas Mimicking Other Pancreatic Tumor: a Case Report

Diagnosis and Treatment of Solid-Pseudopapillary Tumor of the Pancreas.

Predictive Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound for Peripancreatic Vascular Invasion in Pancreatic Carcinoma

Male Solid Pseudopapollary Tumor and Non-Functioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor of MSCT Differential Diagnosis

Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor of the Pancreas Cross-Sectional Imaging and Pathologic Correlation

Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor of the Pancreas: a Case Series of 26 Consecutive Patients

Differential Diagnosis Between Pancreatic Solid Pseudopapillary Tumors and Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Based on Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging Features

Solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas:imaging diagnosis and differentiation

Differentiation of Solid-Pseudopapillary Tumors of the Pancreas from Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors by Using Endoscopic Ultrasound.

[Clinicopathological Features of Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor of the Pancreas].

[The Diagnosis and Treatment of Solid-Pseudopapillary Tumor of Pancreas].

Solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas: 27 cases from a single institution

Solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas: report of 8 cases in a single institution and review of the Chinese literature.