November 12, 2014
Notes: Sri Manjari, K
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t
Biochem Genet. 2013 Aug;51(7-8):644-54. doi: 10.1007/s10528-013-9594-9. Epub 2013 May 5.
Author Address: Institute of Genetics and Hospital for Genetic Diseases, Osmania University, Begumpet, Hyderabad 500 016, India.
Reference Type: Journal Article
Record Number: 5197Author: Sumimoto, K., Uchida, K., Mitsuyama, T., Fukui, Y., Kusuda, T., Miyoshi, H., Tomiyama, T., Fukata, N., Koyabu, M., Sakaguchi, Y., Ikeura, T., Shimatani, M., Fukui, T., Matsushita, M., Takaoka, M., Nishio, A. and Okazaki, K.
Title: A proposal of a diagnostic algorithm with validation of International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for autoimmune pancreatitis in a Japanese cohort
Short Title: A proposal of a diagnostic algorithm with validation of International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for autoimmune pancreatitis in a Japanese cohort
Alternate Journal: Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology
ISSN: 1424-3911 (Electronic)
Accession Number: 23719593
Asian Continental Ancestry Group
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Among many diagnostic criteria for autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria (ICDC) first enabled us to diagnose and compare type 1 and type 2 AIP, which permitted tailoring individual diagnostic algorithms depending on local expertise. We compared them and validated ICDC with special reference to levels 1 and 2, and proposed a diagnostic algorithm for AIP in Japan. METHODS: The diagnostic sensitivity of 5 major criteria (ICDC, Korean, Japanese-2011, Asian, and HISORt criteria) was compared, using 61 patients with AIP. Fifty six patients with pancreatic cancer served as a control. Pancreas imaging on computed tomography (CT) and endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) were independently evaluated by 3 pancreatologists (5, 10, and 20 years of career experience) and each diagnostic criterion of ICDC was validated with special reference to levels 1 and 2. RESULTS: The sensitivities of 5 major criteria were 95.1% (ICDC), 90.2% (Korean), 86.9% (Japanese), 83.6% (Asian), and 83.6% (HISORt) with 100% of specificity in each. In the evaluation of pancreas imaging, diagnostic sensitivities of combination with CT and ERP in segmental/focal type AIP were significantly higher than single imaging (26% in CT (P < 0.01) or 35% in ERP (P < 0.05) vs 63% in CT + ERP), but not significantly different in the diffuse type. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 5 criteria, ICDC is the most sensitive and useful for diagnosing AIP. We have proposed a diagnostic algorithm with CT for the diffuse type of AIP, and combination with CT + ERP followed by EUS-FNA for the segmental/focal type.