Literature DB >> 21739880

Correlation between MRCP and ERCP findings at a tertiary care hospital.

Rubayat Rahman1, Justina Ju, John Shamma's, Stephan Goebel, Uma Sundaram.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is common clinical practice to obtain Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) prior to Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to evaluate the biliary system. With recent improvements of MRCP, it is important to correlate the findings of these two studies. AIM: To examine the correlation between MRCP and ERCP findings in patients at a tertiary care hospital.
METHODS: A total of 165 patients were identified who underwent MRCP prior to ERCP at West Virginia University between July 1, 2004 and June 30, 2006 (98 females and 67 males). Patients' demographic information and their laboratory values and diagnostic study outcomes prior to procedure were collected, entered into MS Access, and analyzed using SAS 10.0. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated. Two-tailed p-values of <= 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Baseline demographic characteristics were comparable between male and female patients. Hepatobiliary and pancreatic duct results were grouped together. MRCP was 74.6% sensitive and 83.5% specific for choledocholithiasis, 85.4% sensitive and 87.4% specific for strictures, 85.9% sensitive and 91.2% specific for obstruction, 92.4% sensitive and 93.5% specific for ductal dilatation, and 90.8% sensitive and 92.6% specific for detection of periductal masses. MRCP appeared to have more false negative results for choledocholithiasis and strictures and more false positive results for ductal dilatation and periductal mass detection compared with ERCP.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with presentations suggestive of hepatobiliary and pancreatic disease, despite recent improvements in MRCP technique, the sensitivity and specificity of MRCP is still not close enough to that of ERCP for detection of choledocholithiasis, hepatobiliary and pancreatic ductal dilatation, periductal masses, or obstruction to be used as a substitute. Thus, ERCP remains the gold standard for visualization of the hepatobiliary and pancreatic tree.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21739880

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  W V Med J        ISSN: 0043-3284


  6 in total

1.  MRCP is not a cost-effective strategy in the management of silent common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Irene Epelboym; Megan Winner; John D Allendorf
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a combined (one-step) procedure: a random comparison to the standard (two-step) procedure.

Authors:  Maris Jones; Matthew Johnson; Edward Samourjian; Karen Schlauch; Karen Slauch; Nathan Ozobia
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus intraoperative cholangiography for diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; Vanja Giljaca; Yemisi Takwoingi; David Higgie; Goran Poropat; Davor Štimac; Brian R Davidson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-02-26

Review 4.  Endoscopic ultrasound versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Vanja Giljaca; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; Yemisi Takwoingi; David Higgie; Goran Poropat; Davor Štimac; Brian R Davidson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-02-26

5.  Accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiography compared to operative endoscopy in detecting biliary stones, a single center experience and review of literature.

Authors:  Francesco A Polistina; Mauro Frego; Marco Bisello; Emy Manzi; Antonella Vardanega; Bortolo Perin
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-28

6.  Obstructive jaundice caused by intraductal metastasis of lung adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Nobuaki Ochi; Daisuke Goto; Hiromichi Yamane; Tomoko Yamagishi; Yoshihiro Honda; Yasumasa Monobe; Hirofumi Kawamoto; Nagio Takigawa
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 4.147

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.