Role of abdominal ultrasound for the surveillance follow-up of pancreatic cystic neoplasms: a cost-effective safe alternative to the routine use of magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN), without surgical indication at the time of diagnosis according to current guidelines, require lifetime image-based surveillance follow-up. In these patients, the current European evidenced-based guidelines advise magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning every 6 mo in the first year, then annually for the next five years, without reference to any role for trans-abdominal ultrasound (US). In this study, we report on our clinical experience of a follow-up strategy of image-based surveillance with US, and restricted use of MRI every two years and for urgent evaluation whenever suspicious changes are detected by US. AIM: To report the results and cost-efficacy of a US-based surveillance follow-up for known PCNs, with restricted use of MRI. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records of all the patients treated in our institution with non-surgical PCN who received follow-up abdominal US and restricted MRI from the time of diagnosis, between January 2012 and January 2017. After US diagnosis and MRI confirmation, all patients underwent US surveillance every 6 mo for the first year, and then annually. A MRI scan was routinely performed every 2 years, or at any stage for all suspicious US findings. In this communication, we reported the clinical results of this alternative follow-up, and the results of a comparative cost-analysis between our surveillance protocol (abdominal US and restricted MRI) and the same patient cohort that has been followed-up in strict accordance with the European guidelines recommended for an exclusive MRI-based surveillance protocol. RESULTS: In the 5-year period, 200 patients entered the prescribed US-restricted MRI surveillance follow-up. Mean follow-up period was 25.1 ± 18.2 mo. Surgery was required in two patients (1%) because of the appearance of suspicious features at imaging (with complete concordance between the US scan and the on-demand MRI). During the follow-up, US revealed changes in PCN appearance in 28 patients (14%). These comprised main pancreatic duct dilatation (n = 1), increased size of the main cyst (n = 14) and increased number of PNC (n = 13). In all of these patients, MRI confirmed US findings, without adding more information. The bi-annual MRI identified evolution of the lesions not identified by US in only 11 patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (5.5%), largely consisting of an increased number of very small PCN (P = 0.14). The overall mean cost of surveillance, based on a theoretical use of the European evidenced-based exclusive MRI surveillance in the same group of patients, would have been 1158.9 ± 798.6 € per patient, in contrast with a significantly lower cost of 366.4 ± 348.7 € (P < 0.0001) incurred by the US-restricted MRI surveillance used at our institution. CONCLUSION: In patients with non-surgical PCN at the time of diagnosis, US surveillance could be a safe complementary approach to MRI, delaying and reducing the numbers of second level examinations and therefore reducing the costs.

The complex interplay between gastrointestinal and psychiatric symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome: A longitudinal assessment.

AIMS: The aims of this study were to better define the relationship between irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and psychiatric disorders and to examine the efficacy of paroxetine in the treatment of IBS patients. METHODS: One hundred fifty subjects with diagnosis of IBS (Roma III criteria) and relative sub-classification (constipated, diarrhea, and mixed) were assessed for psychopathological features and gastrointestinal symptoms using IBS Symptom Severity Score and were consecutively enrolled. Fifty patients assumed paroxetine for 16 weeks and were longitudinally evaluated. RESULTS: The entire sample had a moderate/severe gastrointestinal symptomatology (IBS-SSS 285.1 ± 98.6). The IBS subtypes were diarrhea (47.3%), constipated (32%), and mixed (20.7%). Panic disorder was found in 17.4% and major depressive episode in 14.7%. More than 50% of the patients showed "psychopathological features." This group showed more severe gastrointestinal symptoms and worse quality of life than the group without any psychiatric comorbidity (44%). Psychiatric patients also showed a significant impairment of physical state, subjective feeling of well-being, and leisure activities when compared with no psychiatric patients. When the IBS-SSS > 300 group was subgrouped in psychiatric (67.2%) and no psychiatric (32.8%), we found significant differences in all clinician-administered and self-reported scales with more severe psychopathological features in psychiatric group (P < 0.01). Among the patients treated with paroxetine, 34 (68%) completed the longitudinal evaluation showing a significant improvement of both psychiatric and gastrointestinal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms a high presence of psychiatric comorbidities, emphasizing the need for psychiatric screening in all patients with IBS; moreover, the longitudinal evaluation of patients treated with paroxetine showed a significant improvement of both psychiatric and gastrointestinal symptoms.