Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Bifocal solid pseudopapillary tumour of the pancreas
  1. Raffi Melikian1 and
  2. Sujit Kulkarni2
  1. 1Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Keck Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
  2. 2General Surgery, Keck Medical Center of USC, Los Angeles, California, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sujit Kulkarni; sujit.kulkarni{at}


Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas (SPNP) is a rare entity. In this study, we present a woman in her 20’s who presented for evaluation of two separate pancreatic masses. On imaging and biopsy, the tail lesion was thought to be a neuroendocrine tumour and the body lesion was thought to be a metastatic lymph node. The patient was brought to the operating room and underwent a distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course and was discharged home on postoperative day 4. Pathology confirmed both masses were consistent with the diagnosis of well-differentiated SPNP with no signs of malignancy including lymphovascular or perineural invasion, or lymph node involvement.

  • Surgical oncology
  • Surgery

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors The following authors were responsible for drafting of the text, sourcing and editing of clinical images, investigation results, drawing original diagrams and algorithms and critical revision for important intellectual content: RM and SK. The following authors gave final approval of the manuscript: RM and SK.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.