Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024
Clinical predictors of significant findings on EUS for the evaluation of incidental common bile duct dilation.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Raza Zain, Altayar Osama, Mahmoud Tala, Abusaleh Rami, Ghazi Rabih, Early Dayna, Kushnir Vladimir M, Lang Gabriel, Sloan Ian, Hollander Thomas, Rajan Elizabeth, Storm Andrew C, Abu Dayyeh Barham K, Chandrasekhara Vinay, Das Koushik K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although EUS is highly accurate for the evaluation of common bile duct (CBD) dilation, the yield of EUS in patients with incidental CBD dilation is unclear.
METHODS: Serial patients undergoing EUS for incidental, dilated CBD (per radiologist, minimum of >6 mm objectively) from 2 academic medical centers without active pancreaticobiliary disease or significantly elevated liver function test results were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of EUS with significant findings and a novel prediction model was derived from one center, internally validated with bootstrapping, and externally validated at the second center.
RESULTS: Of 375 patients evaluated, 31 (8.3%) had significant findings, including 26 choledocholithiasis, 1 ampullary adenoma, and 1 pancreatic mass. Predictors of significant findings with EUS included age of ≥70 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-10.0), non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain (OR, 6.1; 95% CI, 2.3-17.3), CBD diameter of ≥15 mm or ≥17 mm with cholecystectomy (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 2.7-18.7), and prior ERCP (OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 2.1-22.5). A point-based novel clinical prediction model was created: age of ≥70 years = 1, non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain = 2, prior ERCP = 2, and CBD dilation = 2. A score of <1 had 93% (development) and 100% (validation) sensitivity and predicted a <2% chance of having a significant finding in both cohorts while excluding the need for EUS in ∼30% of both cohorts. Conversely, a score of ≥4 was >90% specific for the presence of significant pathology.
CONCLUSIONS: Less than 10% of patients undergoing EUS for incidental CBD dilation had pathologic findings. This novel, externally validated, clinical prediction model may reduce low-yield, invasive evaluation in nearly one-third of patients.
METHODS: Serial patients undergoing EUS for incidental, dilated CBD (per radiologist, minimum of >6 mm objectively) from 2 academic medical centers without active pancreaticobiliary disease or significantly elevated liver function test results were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of EUS with significant findings and a novel prediction model was derived from one center, internally validated with bootstrapping, and externally validated at the second center.
RESULTS: Of 375 patients evaluated, 31 (8.3%) had significant findings, including 26 choledocholithiasis, 1 ampullary adenoma, and 1 pancreatic mass. Predictors of significant findings with EUS included age of ≥70 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-10.0), non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain (OR, 6.1; 95% CI, 2.3-17.3), CBD diameter of ≥15 mm or ≥17 mm with cholecystectomy (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 2.7-18.7), and prior ERCP (OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 2.1-22.5). A point-based novel clinical prediction model was created: age of ≥70 years = 1, non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain = 2, prior ERCP = 2, and CBD dilation = 2. A score of <1 had 93% (development) and 100% (validation) sensitivity and predicted a <2% chance of having a significant finding in both cohorts while excluding the need for EUS in ∼30% of both cohorts. Conversely, a score of ≥4 was >90% specific for the presence of significant pathology.
CONCLUSIONS: Less than 10% of patients undergoing EUS for incidental CBD dilation had pathologic findings. This novel, externally validated, clinical prediction model may reduce low-yield, invasive evaluation in nearly one-third of patients.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
HumansMaleFemaleEndosonographyAgedMiddle AgedCholedocholithiasisDilatation, PathologicIncidental FindingsCommon Bile DuctAbdominal PainAdenomaAge FactorsPancreatic NeoplasmsAged, 80 and overLogistic ModelsCholecystectomyCommon Bile Duct NeoplasmsCommon Bile Duct DiseasesRetrospective StudiesAmpulla of VaterMultivariate Analysis