What are the criteria that define a resectable pancreatic mass?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: February 12, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Criteria for Resectability of Pancreatic Mass

A pancreatic mass is considered resectable when there is no arterial contact with the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), celiac axis, or common hepatic artery, no distant metastases, and only minimal or reconstructable venous involvement (portal vein/superior mesenteric vein). 1

Classification Framework

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is classified into three distinct categories based on vascular involvement when metastases are absent 2:

Resectable Disease (15-20% of patients at diagnosis)

Arterial criteria:

  • No tumor contact with the SMA, celiac axis, or common hepatic artery 2, 1
  • Clear fat plane preserved around all major arteries 1

Venous criteria:

  • No tumor contact with the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) or portal vein (PV), OR 2
  • Contact with SMV/PV of less than 180° without vessel deformity or thrombosis 2

Distant disease:

  • No evidence of metastatic disease 1

Patient factors:

  • Adequate performance status to tolerate major pancreatic surgery 1
  • Optimized nutritional status 1

Borderline Resectable Disease

This intermediate category requires neoadjuvant therapy before surgery, as upfront resection carries high risk of positive margins 2, 1:

Arterial criteria:

  • Tumor contact with SMA involving <180° of vessel circumference without stenosis or deformity 3, 4, 5
  • Tumor contact with common hepatic artery without involvement of proper hepatic artery or celiac axis 4
  • Short-segment encasement of hepatic artery amenable to resection and reconstruction 3

Venous criteria:

  • Tumor contact with SMV/PV of >180° or causing contour irregularity 4
  • Short-segment venous occlusion with suitable vessels above and below for reconstruction 3, 4
  • Bilateral narrowing or occlusion not extending beyond inferior border of duodenum 4

Biological factors (expanded criteria):

  • CA 19-9 level >500 units/mL 4
  • Suspicious but unproven distant metastases or regional lymph node involvement 4

Conditional factors:

  • ECOG performance status ≥2 despite anatomically resectable disease 4

Locally Advanced/Unresectable Disease

Arterial criteria:

  • Tumor contact with SMA or celiac axis >180° 2
  • Any tumor contact with the aorta 1
  • Unreconstructable arterial involvement 1

Venous criteria:

  • Unreconstructable SMV/PV occlusion 1

Critical Assessment Points

Each major vessel must be evaluated individually 2:

  • Superior mesenteric artery
  • Celiac axis
  • Common hepatic artery
  • Portal vein
  • Superior mesenteric vein

Imaging modalities:

  • CT angiography with pancreatic protocol is the primary staging tool 1
  • MRI for problem-solving indeterminate hepatic lesions or cystic lesions 1
  • EUS-guided biopsy provides tissue diagnosis and complementary staging 2, 1

Important caveat: CT/MRI have >90% positive predictive value for unresectability but <50% positive predictive value for resectability, meaning imaging can reliably rule out resection but cannot definitively confirm it 2

Surgical Goals and Margin Assessment

The primary objective is R0 resection (negative margins ≥1 mm) 2, 1, 6:

Seven margins must be assessed 1, 6:

  • Anterior surface
  • Posterior surface
  • Medial/superior mesenteric groove
  • Superior mesenteric artery margin
  • Pancreatic transection margin
  • Bile duct margin
  • Enteric margin

Venous resection considerations:

  • SMV/PV resection with reconstruction is acceptable to achieve R0 resection 2, 1
  • However, venous resection is associated with lower R0 rates and worse survival due to inherent tumor aggressiveness 2

Arterial resection:

  • Not recommended due to increased morbidity and mortality 2

Critical Pitfalls to Avoid

Do not operate on borderline resectable disease upfront 1:

  • These patients have high probability of R1 resection 2
  • Neoadjuvant therapy should be administered first 1, 3, 7

Do not attempt resection with significant arterial involvement 1:

  • Arterial contact >180° predicts unresectability 2
  • Associated with prohibitive morbidity and mortality 2

Refer to high-volume centers 1, 6:

  • Resection rates are 20% higher at specialized centers 1, 6
  • Mortality is significantly lower 1, 6

Require multidisciplinary evaluation 1, 6:

  • Essential for defining optimal treatment strategy 1
  • Determines whether upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant therapy is appropriate 1

References

Guideline

Criteria for Operable Pancreatic Cancer

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Research

International consensus on definition and criteria of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma 2017.

Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.], 2018

Research

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Current treatment options in gastroenterology, 2005

Guideline

Pre and Post-Surgical Recommendations for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Undergoing Whipple Surgery

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Research

Management of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer.

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2018

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.