JOP : Journal of the pancreas · 2011
Intrapancreatic accessory spleen: investigative dilemmas and role of EUS-guided FNA for diagnostic confirmation.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Krishna Somashekar G, Heif Muhannad M, Sharma Shree G, Pandey Tarun, Rego Rayburn F
Аннотация
CONTEXT: We submit a case of intrapancreatic accessory spleen.
CASE REPORT: A 33-year-old patient with history of dyspepsia underwent imaging studies suggestive of a neuroendocrine tumor. After referral to our institute, endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) confirmed diagnosis as intrapancreatic accessory spleen.
DISCUSSION: An accessory spleen may develop from estranged mesenchymal cells due to fusion failure of the splenic anlage. The prevalence of an accessory spleen is 10-30% with 80% of them present at the splenic hilum and 17% in the pancreatic tail. Intrapancreatic accessory spleen is commonly misdiagnosed as a pancreatic tumor. Since, the differential diagnosis includes pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, additional investigation with EUS-FNA should be considered when radiological diagnosis is not definitive.
CONCLUSION: For diagnosis of intrapancreatic accessory spleen, radiographic imaging is useful, but lacks specificity without tissue diagnosis. Diagnosis can be safely and reliably established with EUS-FNA, leading to a benign prognosis and avoidance of unnecessary surgical intervention.
CASE REPORT: A 33-year-old patient with history of dyspepsia underwent imaging studies suggestive of a neuroendocrine tumor. After referral to our institute, endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) confirmed diagnosis as intrapancreatic accessory spleen.
DISCUSSION: An accessory spleen may develop from estranged mesenchymal cells due to fusion failure of the splenic anlage. The prevalence of an accessory spleen is 10-30% with 80% of them present at the splenic hilum and 17% in the pancreatic tail. Intrapancreatic accessory spleen is commonly misdiagnosed as a pancreatic tumor. Since, the differential diagnosis includes pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, additional investigation with EUS-FNA should be considered when radiological diagnosis is not definitive.
CONCLUSION: For diagnosis of intrapancreatic accessory spleen, radiographic imaging is useful, but lacks specificity without tissue diagnosis. Diagnosis can be safely and reliably established with EUS-FNA, leading to a benign prognosis and avoidance of unnecessary surgical intervention.