Literature DB >> 24179904

The Value of Magnetic Resonance Cholangio-Pancreatography (MRCP) in the Detection of Choledocholithiasis.

Ankur Mandelia1, Arun Kumar Gupta, Devendra Kumar Verma, Sanjeev Sharma.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic Resonance Cholangio-Pancreatography (MRCP) is a non-invasive radiological investigation which can be performed rapidly and which does not expose the patients to ionised radiations or iodinated contrast material. The present study was conducted to evaluate the role of MRCP in detection of Common Bile Duct (CBD) stones in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study included 30 patients with a suspicion of choledocholithiasis which was based on clinical evaluation, biochemical or radiological investigations. Ultrasonography and MRCP were performed in all patients. All patients underwent open surgery. CBD exploration was performed in all patients, either due to presence of palpable stones or due to the presence of dilated CBD (> 7 mm). Demonstration of CBD stones intra-operatively was considered the 'gold standard' for their presence, defined as stones visualised and extracted or attempted for extraction during surgical CBD exploration.
RESULTS: Intra-operatively, 21 (70%) out of 30 patients had cholelithiasis. 26 (86.67%) out of 30 patients had dilated CBD stones intra-operatively. In 20 (66.67%) out of 30 patients, choledocholithiasis was detected intra-operatively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of ultrasonography in detecting CBD stones in the present study was 65%, 60%, 76.47% and 46.15% respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of MRCP in diagnosis of CBD stones in the present study was 95%, 90%, 95% and 90% respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: MRCP is a non-invasive investigation without complications and it has high sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values in detection of CBD stones. MRCP should be done in all cases with a suspicion of CBD stones, where facilities and expertise are available.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Choledocholithiasis; ERCP; MRCP

Year:  2013        PMID: 24179904      PMCID: PMC3809643          DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/6158.3365

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res        ISSN: 0973-709X


  21 in total

1.  The diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasound compared with direct cholangiography in the detection of choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  J C Varghese; R P Liddell; M A Farrell; F E Murray; H Osborne; M J Lee
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 2.  The role of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with suspected biliary obstruction.

Authors:  Mannudeep Kalra; Dushyant Sahani; Aamir Ahmad; Sanjay Saini
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2002-04

3.  US diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: a reappraisal.

Authors:  J J Cronan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: value of MR cholangiography.

Authors:  L Guibaud; P M Bret; C Reinhold; M Atri; A N Barkun
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  The insensitivity of sonography in the detection of choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  D M Einstein; S A Lapin; P W Ralls; J M Halls
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Evaluation of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the management of bile duct stones.

Authors:  N Demartines; L Eisner; K Schnabel; R Fried; M Zuber; F Harder
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2000-02

7.  Choledocholithiasis and bile duct stenosis: diagnostic accuracy of MR cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  C D Becker; M Grossholz; M Becker; G Mentha; R de Peyer; F Terrier
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Improved visualization of choledocholithiasis by sonography.

Authors:  F C Laing; R B Jeffrey; V W Wing
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Choledocholithiasis: evaluation of MR cholangiography for diagnosis.

Authors:  C Reinhold; P Taourel; P M Bret; G A Cortas; S N Mehta; A N Barkun; L Wang; F Tafazoli
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Prospective diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  J J Cronan; P R Mueller; J F Simeone; R S O'Connell; E vanSonnenberg; J Wittenberg; J T Ferrucci
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  9 in total

1.  Comparative performance of non-contrast MRI with HASTE vs. contrast-enhanced MRI/3D-MRCP for possible choledocholithiasis in hospitalized patients.

Authors:  Stella K Kang; Laura Heacock; Ankur M Doshi; Justin R Ream; Jeffrey Sun; James S Babb
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-06

2.  Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis: From guidelines to clinical practice.

Authors:  Joana Magalhães; Bruno Rosa; José Cotter
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-02-16

Review 3.  Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  Wen Chen; Jing-Jia Mo; Li Lin; Chao-Qun Li; Jian-Feng Zhang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Endoscopic ultrasonography versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis: Comments from the radiologists'.

Authors:  Sheng Pan; Qiyong Guo
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.628

5.  Routine MRCP in the management of patients with gallbladder stones awaiting cholecystectomy: a single-centre experience.

Authors:  Valentina Virzì; Noemi Maria Giovanna Ognibene; Antonio Salvatore Sciortino; Glenda Culmone; Giuseppe Virzì
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2018-07-05

6.  Is preoperative MRCP necessary for patients with gallstones? An analysis of the factors related to missed diagnosis of choledocholithiasis by preoperative ultrasound.

Authors:  Yan Qiu; Zhengpeng Yang; Zhituo Li; Weihui Zhang; Dongbo Xue
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-11-14       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Efficacy of oral contrast agents for upper gastrointestinal signal suppression in MRCP: A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Anne Frisch; Thula C Walter; Bernd Hamm; Timm Denecke
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2017-08-30

8.  Performance survey on a new standardized formula for oral signal suppression in MRCP.

Authors:  Anne Frisch; Thula C Walter; Christian Grieser; Dominik Geisel; Bernd Hamm; Timm Denecke
Journal:  Eur J Radiol Open       Date:  2017-12-23

Review 9.  Pancreatic imaging: Current status of clinical practices and small animal studies.

Authors:  Ting Yin; Yewei Liu; Ronald Peeters; Yuanbo Feng; Yicheng Ni
Journal:  World J Methodol       Date:  2017-09-26
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.