Skip to main content

Table 6 Surgeons’ knowledge and opinion about the diagnosis of PC

From: Surgeons’ knowledge regarding the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in China: a cross-sectional study

Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer Agree (%) Disagree (%) Unsure (%) Missing (%)
Candidate tumor marker CEA 412(58.4) 193(27.4) 15(2.1) 85(12.1)
CA19–9 634(89.9) 50(7.1) 2(0.3) 19(2.7)
CA242 313(44.4) 213(30.2) 18(2.6) 161(22.8)
Ultrasonograph (US) Can be used to judge tumor size as the first line test 630(89.4) 57(8.1) 0(0.0) 18(2.6)
has a high accuracy to detect PC less than 1 cm 171(24.3) 473(67.1) 6(0.9) 55(7.8)
Low echoic mass is a sign of PC 560(79.4%) 100(14.2) 1(0.1) 44(6.2)
Dilatation of the pancreatic duct is a sign of PC 463(65.7) 165(23.4) 4(0.6) 73(10.4)
Dilatation of the common bile duct is a sign of PC 549(77.9) 98(13.9) 4(0.6) 54(7.7)
CT Plain CT can be used to judge the location, size and boundary of the tumor 492(69.8) 163(23.1) 1(0.1) 49(7.0)
Enhanced CT has a high accuracy to detect tumors <3 cm 604(85.7) 80(11.4) 3(0.4) 18(2.6)
Can judge the extension of pancreatic cancer accurately 528(74.9) 109(15.5) 17(2.4) 51(7.2)
Enhanced CT combined with 3-demension reconstruction of blood vessels is the best method to determine resectability 621(88.1) 46(6.5) 15(2.1) 23(3.3)
MRI MRI is better than CT to detect and stage PC 328(46.5) 229(32.5) 1(0.1) 147(20.9)
Good for detection of peripancreatic and lymphatic invasion 514(72.9) 133(18.9) 1(0.1) 57(8.1)
PET A promising modality to differentiate malignant from benign lesions 483(68.5) 145(20.6) 2(0.3) 75(10.6)
Can be used to judge the presence or absence of distant metastases 600(85.1) 78(11.1) 1(0.1) 26(3.7)
High accuracy for resectability 365(51.8) 238(33.8) 2(0.3) 100(14.2)
pancreascopy Best indicated for those could not be diagnosed by ERCP 520(73.8) 116(16.5) 3(0.4) 66(9.4)
Good for early detection of PC 528(74.9) 131(18.6) 3(0.4) 43(6.1)
Can be used to perform biopsy and cytology 605(85.8) 71(10.1) 5(0.7) 24(3.4)