| Literature DB >> 15329152 |
Michele Rossi1, Vito Cantisani, Filippo Maria Salvatori, Alberto Rebonato, Laura Greco, Luigi Giglio, Giampiero Guido, Elisa Pagliara, Vincenzo David.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the sophisticated cross sectional image techniques currently available, a number of biliary stenosis or obstructions remain of an uncertain nature. In these pathological conditions, an "intrinsic" parietal alteration is the cause of biliary obstruction and it is very difficult to differentiate benign from malignant lesions using cross-sectional imaging procedures alone. We evaluated the efficacy of different endoluminal techniques to achieve a definitive pathological diagnosis in these situations.Entities:
Year: 2004 PMID: 15329152 PMCID: PMC517715 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2342-4-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Imaging ISSN: 1471-2342 Impact factor: 1.930
Figure 4A 58 year old man, who 8 years ago underwent left hepatectomy and cholecistectomy, for complicated intrahepatic biliary stones, presented with jaundice and weight loss. Enhanced CT scan showed marked intrahepatic biliary dilation.
Figure 5Same patient as fig 4, at lower level, although, an extrinsic mass was not detected, the lumen of CBD appeared replacement by soft tissue mass density (arrows).
Figure 3A metallic flexible probe with a cilindrical brush at the atraumatic tip, 5 mm in diameter 10 mm in length(Olympus Italia srl. Code number BC2029501) brush (approximately 1 cm in length and 5 mm in diameter)
Figure 1Flexible cholangioscope (5 mm in diameter) (Olympus, URF, type P, Japan)
Figure 2Alligator forceps (Olympus, FB 195X, Japan). The wire tip is open 25
Differentiation of biliary obstruction with different percutaneous endoluminal techniques
| Brushing | 43 * | 39/43 | 11 | 16 | 0 | 12 |
| Biopsy | 47 * | 47/47 | 35 | 9 | 0 | 3 |
| Balloon Brushing | 12 | 12/12 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
SR= Success Rate; TP= True Positive; TN= True Negative; FP= false positive; FN= False Negative
*22 patients underwent either brushing and forceps biopsy.
True positives
| Cholangiocarcinoma | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | |||
| Metastatic adenoca. | |||
| Pancreatic carcinoma | |||
| Neuroendocrine tumor |
True negatives
| Sclerosing cholangitis | |||
| Biliary cirrhosis | |||
| Iatrogenic strictures |
False negatives
| Cholangiocarcinoma | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | |||
| Pancreatic carcinoma |
Statistical analysis
| Brushing | 47.8% 28.10–69.66* | 100% 87.30–100.00* | 69.2% | 100% | 57.1% |
| Biopsy | 92.1% 75.56–98.53* | 100% 89.34–100.00* | 93.6% | 100% | 75% |
| Balloon brushing | 87.5% 52.30–99.96* | 100% 64.31–100.00* | 91.7% | 100% | 80% |
* 99% C.I. (Geigy scientific tables)
Cohen's Kappa value
| Brushing vs follow-up | 0.404 | 0.001 |
| Biospy vs follow-up | 0.613 | 0.019 |