Literature DB >> 9494483

Breath-hold MR cholangiography with snapshot techniques: prospective comparison with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography.

N Holzknecht1, J Gauger, M Sackmann, R F Thoeni, J Schurig, J Holl, M Weinzierl, T Helmberger, G Paumgartner, M Reiser.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare findings with magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiography with rapid acquisition with relaxation enhancement (RARE) and half-Fourier acquisition with single-shot turbo spin-echo (hereafter, half Fourier RARE) snapshot imaging techniques to those with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Heavily T2-weighted thick-section (RARE) and thin-section (half-Fourier RARE) MR cholangiography were performed prospectively, on a 1.5-T imager, in the biliary tree of 61 consecutive patients before ERC. Findings at ERC were considered the standard of reference. The radiologist and endoscopist were blinded to each other's report. On- and off-site MR cholangiographic readings were performed to detect stones (n = 24), biliary dilatation (n = 34), or stenosis (n = 36).
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of MR cholangiography, respectively, calculated on a lesion-by-lesion basis, were 92.3% and 95.8% for cholangiolithiasis, 94.1% and 92.6% for duct dilatation, and 88.8% and 84.0% for stenosis. With snapshot MR cholangiography, on a patient-by-patient basis, differentiation between normal (n = 15) and abnormal (n = 46) results yielded a sensitivity of 92.4%, a specificity of 83.4%, and a positive predictive value of 95.6%. Pitfalls were caused by flow artifacts, compression by vessels, and low contrast between calculi and surrounding parenchyma.
CONCLUSION: Snapshot MR cholangiography allowed noninvasive, accurate detection of biliary stones, strictures, and dilatation similar to that with ERC. Discrepancies regarding low-grade dilatation and strictures had no clinical relevance at retrospective review.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9494483     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.206.3.9494483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  25 in total

1.  Helical computed tomographic cholangiography versus endosonography for suspected bile duct stones: a prospective blinded study in non-jaundiced patients.

Authors:  M Polkowski; J Palucki; J Regula; A Tilszer; E Butruk
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 2.  Biliary tract imaging.

Authors:  E Corazziari
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  1999-04

3.  Gallstones.

Authors: 
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  1999-04

4.  Compression of the extrahepatic bile duct by the portal vein: a diagnostic pitfall of MR cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  Hidemasa Takao; Ko Yamahira; Ippei Doi; Toshiaki Watanabe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-09-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  [Comparison of 2D and 3D sequences for MRCP. Clinical value of the different techniques].

Authors:  A M Wallnoefer; K A Herrmann; U Beuers; C J Zech; S Gourtsoyianni; M F Reiser; S O Schoenberg
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound in patients at high risk of choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  George Dittrick; Jeffrey P Lamont; Joseph A Kuhn; Damien Mallat
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2005-07

7.  The value of drip infusion cholangiography using multidetector-row helical CT in patients with choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  Masahiro Okada; Jun-Ichi Fukada; Kazuhito Toya; Reiko Ito; Toshio Ohashi; Atsunori Yorozu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-06-21       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Staging of Klatskin tumours (hilar cholangiocarcinomas): comparison of MR cholangiography, MR imaging, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography.

Authors:  Thomas J Vogl; Wolfram O Schwarz; Matthias Heller; Christopher Herzog; Stephan Zangos; Rainer E Hintze; Peter Neuhaus; Renate M Hammerstingl
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-04-19       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Use of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: prospective comparison with a reference imaging method.

Authors:  S H Zidi; F Prat; O Le Guen; Y Rondeau; L Rocher; J Fritsch; A D Choury; G Pelletier
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 10.  Cross-sectional imaging of biliary tumors: current clinical status and future developments.

Authors:  Christoph J Zech; Stefan O Schoenberg; Maximilian Reiser; Thomas Helmberger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-04-23       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.