CT grading of blunt pancreatic injuries: Prediction of ductal disruption and surgical correlation

Yon Cheong Wong, Li Jen Wang, Being Chuan Lin, Chi Jen Chen, Kun Eng Lim, Ray Jade Chen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

77 Citations (Scopus)


Purpose: The purpose of our study was to devise a CT grading scheme for blunt pancreatic injuries (BPIs) and to apply it to predict the presence or absence of ductal disruption. Method: We retrospectively reviewed CT scans of 22 patients with proven BPIs. We graded these injuries on CT (A, BI, BII, CI, and CII) based on the (a) presence or absence of pancreatic lacerations, (b) site of lacerations, and (c) depth of lacerations. CT grading was correlated with surgical findings for glandular and ductal injuries. Results: Main pancreatic ducts were intact in 2 patients with normal CT scans and in all grade A injuries (n = 10). Distal pancreatic ducts were disrupted in all grade B injuries (BI, n = 1; BII, n = 4). Of five grade C injuries, three CII injuries had disruption of proximal pancreatic duct, one CII injury had disruption of minor duct, and one CI injury had an intact ductal system. Conclusion: CT grading of BPIs was useful in predicting ductal integrity or disruption. Ductal disruption was likely present if the pancreas appeared to have a transection or deep laceration on CT scans. It was accurate in grade A and B injuries. Overestimation could occur in grade CI and CII injuries.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)246-250
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Computer Assisted Tomography
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1997
Externally publishedYes


  • Computed tomography
  • Pancreas, abnormalities
  • Pancreas, ducts
  • Pancreas, wounds and injuries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology


Dive into the research topics of 'CT grading of blunt pancreatic injuries: Prediction of ductal disruption and surgical correlation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this