Literature DB >> 11569689

Patient satisfaction after MRCP and ERCP.

K Menon1, A N Barkun, J Romagnuolo, G Friedman, S N Mehta, C Reinhold, P M Bret.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is an accurate diagnostic test for detecting abnormalities of the pancreaticobiliary system. Because it is noninvasive, MRCP appears to be more tolerable than ERCP, although this has not been studied. The purpose of this study is to compare patient satisfaction after MRCP and ERCP performed sequentially.
METHODS: We prospectively recruited 34 patients undergoing ERCP, for whom an MRCP was able to be performed before ERCP. Patient satisfaction was assessed by validated questionnaires using seven-point Likhert scales (individual ratings and direct comparisons). The following dimensions were explored: anxiety, pain, discomfort, tolerability (relative to expectations), willingness to repeat the procedure, and overall preference. Chi2 and Student's t tests (paired and unpaired) were performed, and 95% CIs were provided.
RESULTS: Two patients (5.9%) were unable to undergo MRCP because of claustrophobia. The remaining 32 completed both tests (94% same day) and all questionnaires. Average age was 56+/-18 yr, and 66% were women. In 23 patients, some degree of biliary obstruction was suspected; nine patients had pancreatitis. Patients reported a lower degree of pain (p < 0.001) and discomfort (p = 0.047) with MRCP, but MRCP was more difficult than they expected (p = 0.0 12). Patients were marginally more willing to repeat MRCP (ns, p = 0.09). On direct comparisons, patients were more satisfied with MRCP regarding anxiety (p = 0.04) and pain (p = 0.001). Patients displayed a higher overall preference for MRCP compared with ERCP (p = 0.01); however, only 59% clearly preferred MRCP over ERCP. The most common problem with MRCP was claustrophobia or noise (n = 15), and the differences were more striking in the subgroup without this problem. The subgroup undergoing purely diagnostic ERCPs showed clear preferences for MRCP.
CONCLUSIONS: In many respects, MRCP is well tolerated, and certain subgroups, especially those undergoing diagnostic ERCPs, prefer MRCP over ERCP. As an endoscopist, one needs to be aware of the limitations of MRCP and relay these to the patient, as it seems that patients find MRCP more difficult than anticipated, and a significant number still prefer ERCP over MRCP. Patient satisfaction may be further improved by reducing noise and claustrophobia with selective premedication, earplugs, and the use of the new quieter fenestrated magnetic resonance imaging scanners.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11569689     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.04117.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  9 in total

1.  The burden of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) performed with the patient under conscious sedation.

Authors:  S M Jeurnink; E W Steyerberg; E J Kuipers; P D Siersema
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Choledocholithiasis: repetitive thick-slab single-shot projection magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography versus endoscopic ultrasonography.

Authors:  S Schmidt; P Chevallier; S Novellas; E Gelsi; G Vanbiervliet; A Tran; P Schnyder; J N Bruneton
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-08-29       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Canadian credentialing guidelines for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  Johnathon Springer; Robert Enns; Joseph Romagnuolo; Terry Ponich; Alan N Barkun; David Armstrong
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.522

4.  Short- versus long-sequence MRI cholangiography for the preoperative imaging of the common bile duct in patients with cholecystolithiasis.

Authors:  A Shamiyeh; E Lindner; J Danis; K Schwarzenlander; W Wayand
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-05-26       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Cost effectiveness of intraoperative laparoscopic ultrasound for suspected choledocholithiasis; outcomes from a specialist benign upper gastrointestinal unit.

Authors:  S Donoghue; R M Jones; A Bush; G Srinivas; K Bowling; S Andrews
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Acceptance of noninvasive computed tomography coronary angiography: for a patient-friendly medicine.

Authors:  Ludovico La Grutta; Sabina La Grutta; Massimo Galia; Giuseppe Lo Piccolo; Giovanni Gentile; Giuseppe La Tona; Maria Stella Epifanio; Erica Maffei; Filippo Cademartiri; Rosa Lo Baido; Roberto Lagalla; Massimo Midiri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 3.469

7.  Patient acceptance of noninvasive and invasive coronary angiography.

Authors:  Eva Schönenberger; Dirk Schnapauff; Florian Teige; Michael Laule; Bernd Hamm; Marc Dewey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  MRCP compared to diagnostic ERCP for diagnosis when biliary obstruction is suspected: a systematic review.

Authors:  Eva C Kaltenthaler; Stephen J Walters; Jim Chilcott; Anthony Blakeborough; Yolanda Bravo Vergel; Steven Thomas
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2006-08-14       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  Comparison of propofol-nalbuphine and propofol-fentanyl sedation for patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Weidong Mi; Longhe Xu; Peiqi Wang; Yan Chen; Ying Guo; Jiangbei Cao; Hong Wang
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 2.217

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.