| Literature DB >> 31969960 |
Önder Yeniçeri1, Neşat Çullu1, Burak Özşeker1, Emine Neşe Yeniçeri1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate interobserver agreement during magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography (MRCP) evaluation and the sensitivity and specificity of MRCP obtained with 3T scanners in cases of bile duct obstruction.Entities:
Keywords: ERCP; MRCP; bile duct; cholelithiasis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31969960 PMCID: PMC6964331 DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2019.89689
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pol J Radiol ISSN: 1733-134X
Parameters of sequences used in magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography
| TR (msn) | TE (msn) | Slice thickness (mm) | FOV (cm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axial HASTE | 1600 | 95 | 5 | 37 × 29 |
| Coronal HASTE | 1400 | 108 | 5 | 37 × 34 |
| T2 SPACE | 4489 | 702 | 1 | 37 × 37 |
Demographic, biochemical, and ultrasonographic data of the cases
| No choledocholithiasis ( | Choledocholithiasis ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 56 (14-72) | 69.50 (27-91) | 0.029 |
| Total bilirubin (mg/dl) | 1.70 (0.28-7.05) | 2.75 (0.49-11.45) | 0.406 |
| AST (U/l) | 49 (28-257) | 65 (10-552) | 0.815 |
| ALT (U/l) | 62 (20-307) | 95 (10-587) | 0.815 |
| GGT (U/l) | 225 (19-546) | 250 (20-1397) | 0.410 |
| ALP (U/l) | 102 (55-308) | 155 (23-667) | 0.178 |
| Cholelithiasis ( | 5 | 18 | |
| Cholecystectomies ( | 2 | 12 | |
| CBD diameter (mm) | 5 (3-8) | 11.65 (6-23) | < 0.001 |
CBD – common bile duct, min – minimum, max – maximum
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy values both observers
| Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | Accuracy (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observer 1 | 93 | 75 | 93 | 75 | 89 |
| Observer 2 | 93 | 62 | 90 | 71 | 86 |
Figure 1A) There was a hypointensity in axial HASTE series in central portion of distal bile duct (choledoc: arrowhead) (gall bladder: open arrow). B, C) This hypointensity was not seen in coronal HASTE and T2 SPACE MIP images
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) reported in the literature for MRCP in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis
| Author | Year | Scanner (Tesla) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Present study | 2017 | 3T | 37 | 93 | 69 | 91.5 | 73 |
| Makmun [ | 2017 | 1.5 | 31 | 81 | 40 | 74 | 50 |
| Badger [ | 2016 | 1.5 or 3 | 47 | 90 | 86 | 97 | 60 |
| Aydelotte [ | 2015 | 1.5 | 36 | 90 | 88 | 97 | 64 |
| Polistina [ | 2015 | 1.5 | 111 | 77.4 | 100 | 100 | 85 |
| Richard | 2013 | NR | 70 | 27 | 83 | 36 | 77 |
| Demartine [ | 2000 | 1.5 | 40 | 100 | 95.6 | 92.6 | 100 |
In this study, MRCP was compared with intraoperative cholangiography
In this study, MRCP was compared with intraoperative cholangiography or ERCP
NR – not reported