To determine the diagnostic efficacy of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in cases of pancreatic solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (PSPN) with emphasis on the cytomorphological features and to evaluate the contribution of immunocytochemistry on FNAC cell-block (CB) in cases of PSPN.

It is a retrospective study in which ultrasound-guided FNAC of pancreatic lesions diagnosed as PSPN between years 2009 and July 2019 were reviewed along with cytohistological correlation. Immunocytochemistry on CB was performed, wherever required.

A total of 16 patients with a cytological diagnosis of PSPN of the pancreas were identified. The most common cytological findings were characteristic branching pseudopapillary fragments with central thin, delicate capillaries associated with the amorphous myxoid substance, surrounded by tumour cells with mild pleomorphism. Immunocytochemistry was performed on CB of six cases. The tumour cells revealed nucleocytoplasmic positivity for β-catenin, cytoplasmic positivity for vimentin, membranocytoplasmic positivity for CD10 and nuclear positivity for progesterone receptor in all the cases, while they were negative for chromogranin, CD56, pan-cytokeratin and epithelial membrane antigen. The resected histopathological specimen was available in 10cases, and all were confirmed as PSPN.

Although PSPN has a characteristic cytomorphology, cell-block immunocytochemistry on FNA material confirms the diagnosis in problematic cases and excludes other pancreatic tumours, thus helping in appropriate management.

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm is a rare tumor of the pancreas. These tumors are considered to have low malignant potential with good prognosis. Due to its rarity, details about clinical presentation and management of the disease are not very clear. This study aims to share our experience and to describe management of the disease. We retrospectively evaluated patients 13 patients diagnosed with SPT on histopathological examination of resected specimen. Data on their clinicopathological, management-related factors, and follow-up was collected. All the patients were females, with a median age of 20 years. Abdominal pain was the most common presentation. The mean tumor size was 6.5 cm and majority of tumors were located in the head region. R0 resection was obtained in all the patients. All patients were disease-free with a median follow-up of 68 months. Excellent prognosis can be achieved with a margin-negative resection in these tumors. Adjacent organ or vascular involvement is not a contraindication for surgical resection.

Increasing numbers of incidental pancreatic lesions are being detected each year. Accurate characterisation of pancreatic lesions into benign, precancerous, and cancer masses is crucial in deciding whether to use treatment or surveillance. Distinguishing benign lesions from precancerous and cancerous lesions can prevent patients from undergoing unnecessary major surgery. Despite the importance of accurately classifying pancreatic lesions, there is no clear algorithm for management of focal pancreatic lesions.

To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of various imaging modalities in detecting cancerous and precancerous lesions in people with focal pancreatic lesions.

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index until 19 July 2016. We searched the references of included studies to identify further studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

We planned to include studies reporting cross-sectional information on the index test (CT (computed tomography), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), PET (positron emission tomography), EUS (endoscopic ultrasound), EUS elastography, and EUS-guided biopsy or FNA (fine-needle aspiration)) and reference standard (confirmation of the nature of the lesion was obtained by histopathological examination of the entire lesion by surgical excision, or histopathological examination for confirmation of precancer or cancer by biopsy and clinical follow-up of at least six months in people with negative index tests) in people with pancreatic lesions irrespective of language or publication status or whether the data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

Two review authors independently searched the references to identify relevant studies and extracted the data. We planned to use the bivariate analysis to calculate the summary sensitivity and specificity with their 95% confidence intervals and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) to compare the tests and assess heterogeneity, but used simpler models (such as univariate random-effects model and univariate fixed-effect model) for combining studies when appropriate because of the sparse data. We were unable to compare the diagnostic performance of the tests using formal statistical methods because of sparse data.

We included 54 studies involving a total of 3,196 participants evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of various index tests. In these 54 studies, eight different target conditions were identified with different final diagnoses constituting benign, precancerous, and cancerous lesions. None of the studies was of high methodological quality. None of the comparisons in which single studies were included was of sufficiently high methodological quality to warrant highlighting of the results. For differentiation of cancerous lesions from benign or precancerous lesions, we identified only one study per index test. The second analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous versus benign lesions, provided three tests in which meta-analysis could be performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing cancer were: EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 1.00), specificity 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.00); EUS: sensitivity 0.95 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.99), specificity 0.53 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.74); PET: sensitivity 0.92 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.97), specificity 0.65 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84). The third analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous lesions from benign lesions, only provided one test (EUS-FNA) in which meta-analysis was performed. EUS-FNA had moderate sensitivity for diagnosing precancerous or cancerous lesions (sensitivity 0.73 (95% CI 0.01 to 1.00) and high specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.00), the extremely wide confidence intervals reflecting the heterogeneity between the studies). The fourth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (dysplasia) provided three tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing invasive carcinoma were: CT: sensitivity 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.87), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.97); EUS: sensitivity 0.78 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.94), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.98); EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.66 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.99), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.98). The fifth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) versus precancerous (low- or intermediate-grade dysplasia) provided six tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing cancer (high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) were: CT: sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.00 to 1.00), specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.00 to 1.00); EUS: sensitivity 0.86 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.92), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96); EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.47 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.00); EUS-FNA carcinoembryonic antigen 200 ng/mL: sensitivity 0.58 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.83), specificity 0.51 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.81); MRI: sensitivity 0.69 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.86), specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.00); PET: sensitivity 0.90 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.96), specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.99). The sixth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) provided no tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The seventh analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous (intermediate- or high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) provided two tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cancer were: CT: sensitivity 0.83 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.92), specificity 0.83 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.93) and MRI: sensitivity 0.80 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.92), specificity 0.81 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.95), respectively. The eighth analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous (intermediate- or high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) or benign lesions provided no test in which meta-analysis was performed.There were no major alterations in the subgroup analysis of cystic pancreatic focal lesions (42 studies; 2086 participants). None of the included studies evaluated EUS elastography or sequential testing.

We were unable to arrive at any firm conclusions because of the differences in the way that study authors classified focal pancreatic lesions into cancerous, precancerous, and benign lesions; the inclusion of few studies with wide confidence intervals for each comparison; poor methodological quality in the studies; and heterogeneity in the estimates within comparisons.

Solid Pseudopapillary Tumour (SPPT) is a distinctive tumour of low malignant potential with a striking and unexplained predilection for adolescent girls and young women. Hence it is important to distinguish this rare tumour from other pancreatic tumours with similar cytomorphologic features because an accurate preoperative diagnosis is highly desirable since these patients can have long survival with adequate surgery. We report a case of the rare SPPT of the pancreas in a young girl who presented with nonspecific pain in the abdomen. Radiological investigations revealed a solid cystic mass in relation to the uncinate process of pancreas and third part of duodenum. The mass was diagnosed to be a solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of pancreas on ultrasound guided FNAC. Surgical removal of the pancreatic tumour and detailed histologic study confirmed the cytologic diagnosis. We present this case because, to date, there are few case reports on the cytological diagnosis of this tumour, about 60 cases, diagnosed by Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology (FNAC) are reported in the literature. With widespread availability of high-quality imaging systems and a better understanding of its pathology, the number of cases reported in the literature has been steadily increasing in recent years. In our case, the cytological diagnosis was done even before the detailed imaging findings were available, the cytological features of this tumour are highly characteristic and it is possible to differentiate it from other pancreatic tumours with relative ease.

Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are increasingly frequent radiological incidentalomas, with a considerable proportion representing precursors of pancreatic cancer. Better diagnostic tools are required for patients to benefit from this development.

To evaluate whether cyst fluid mucin expression could predict malignant potential and/or transformation in PCLs, a proteomic method was devised and prospectively evaluated in consecutive patients referred to our tertiary center for endoscopic ultrasound-guided aspiration of cystic lesions from May 2007 through November 2008 (discovery cohort) and from December 2008 through October 2012 (validation cohort). Cytology and cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA; premalignancy > 192 ng/mL, malignancy > 1000 ng/mL) were routinely analyzed, and samples were further processed as follows: one-dimensional gel electrophoresis, excision of high-mass areas, tryptic digestion and nano-liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, with peptide identification by Mascot software and an in-house mucin database. All diagnostic evaluations were blinded to proteomics results. Histology was required to confirm the presence/absence of malignant transformation. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Proteomic mucin profiling proved statistically significantly more accurate (97.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 90.3% to 99.6%) than cytology (71.4%; 95% CI = 59.8% to 80.9%; P < .001) and cyst fluid CEA (78.0%; 95% CI = 65.0% to 87.3%; P < .001) in identifying the 37 (out of 79; 46.8%) lesions with malignant potential (ie, premalignant or malignant tumors). The accuracy of proteomics was nearly identical (96.6% vs 98.0%) between the discovery (n = 29) and validation (n = 50) cohorts. Furthermore, mucin profiling predicted malignant transformation, present in 16 out of 29 (discovery cohort: 9, validation cohort: 20) lesions with available histology, with 89.7% accuracy (95% CI = 71.5% to 97.3%) (for the validation cohort only: 95.0%; 95% CI = 73.1% to 99.7%). This markedly exceeded corresponding results for cytology (51.7%; 95% CI = 32.9% to 70.1%; P = .003) and CEA (57.1%; 95% CI = 34.4% to 77.4%; P = .02).

Proteomic cyst fluid mucin profiling robustly discriminates benign, premalignant, and malignant PCLs. Consequently, it may improve pancreatic cancer prevention and reduce the morbidity burden of unwarranted pancreatic surgery.

Solid pseudopapillary tumor of pancreas (SPTP) is a rare pancreatic tumor of uncertain histogenesis usually affecting young women. Though these tumors have characteristic cytomorphology, it is sometimes difficult to differentiate them from neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas. We reviewed cases of SPTP to delineate the diagnostic cytological features and also observed utility of CD 99 (MIC 2) immunostaining to aid in the diagnosis of this tumor.

This study was designed to demonstrate the utility of CD 99 immunostaining along with cytological features for making a pre-operative diagnosis and delineating it from the neuroendocrine tumor of pancreas which is a close mimic.

Cytomorphological features of 11 cases of solid pseudopapillary neoplasm diagnosed by pre-operative fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) at our institute were reviewed. Immunocytochemistry for CD 99 was also performed on the smears.

All the cases had cellular smears with monomorphic cells lying singly, as loosely cohesive clusters as well as forming delicate pseudopapillae. Presence of intra and extra-cellular basement membrane material, background foamy macrophages and nuclear grooves were the other salient features. Immunocytochemistry for CD 99 could be performed on eight cases and demonstrated typical paranuclear dot-like positivity.

Pre-operative early diagnosis of SPTP can be made by FNAC which can further be aided by CD 99 immunocytochemistry.

The solid pseudopapillary tumor (SPT) of the pancreas is a rare but low-grade malignant tumor with a good prognosis after surgical excision. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) is a minimally invasive, safe and reliable way of diagnosing SPT by providing characteristic cytological and immunochemical specimens. Definitive preoperative diagnosis leads to targeted and minimally invasive surgical resection. In this study, we report three cases of SPTs that were diagnosed through EUS-FNA and underwent successful laparoscopic surgery.

Solid pseudopapillary tumor (SPT) is an uncommon pancreatic neoplasm with low malignant potential. It occurs predominantly in young women. It is very rare in males and nonrelated pediatrics. In children, SPT commonly present as abdominal mass and pain. A 10-year-old male presented with progressively growing palpable tumor in upper abdomen. SPT of pancreas is diagnosed on preoperative fine needle aspiration cytology. This was subsequently confirmed by histopathology and immunohistochemistry. Due to rarity, SPT is not the first option to rule out, especially in children. Preoperative cytological diagnosis of SPT helps in management of this surgically curable neoplasm with good prognosis.

The Papanicolaou stain is a gold-standard staining method for tumor diagnosis in human cytology. However, it has not been used routinely in veterinary cytology, because of its complicated multistep procedure and requirement for wet fixation. Currently, a rapid Papanicolaou stain using air-dried smears is utilized in human cytology, but usefulness of this rapid-air-dry Papanicolaou (RAD-Pap) stain in the veterinary field has not been fully evaluated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of the RAD-Pap stain by using quantitative analysis. Air-dried impression smears were collected from tumor specimens and stained with RAD-Pap and Giemsa. Twelve parameters representing the criteria of malignancy were quantitated, and characteristics of the RAD-Pap were evaluated statistically. The RAD-Pap stain could be applied to all the smears, and images of nucleoli and chromatin patterns were clear and detailed. In quantitative analysis with the RAD-Pap stain, but not with the Giemsa stain, dispersion of nucleolus size and dispersion of nucleolus/nucleus ratio in malignant tumors were significantly higher than those in benign tumors. These findings demonstrated that the RAD-Pap stain was useful for obtaining detailed nuclear information, and the ability to differentiate benignity and malignancy by nucleolus findings was a principal advantage of this stain. This RAD-Pap stain could be routinely used as a supportive staining method in veterinary diagnostic cytology.