AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2002
Diagnosis of intrahepatic stones: superiority of MR cholangiopancreatography over endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kim Tae Kyoung, Kim Bong Soo, Kim Jung Hoon, Ha Hyun Kwon, Kim Pyo Nyun, Kim Ah Young, Lee Moon-Gyu
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the diagnosis of intrahepatic stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the 318 patients who underwent MRCP examinations at our institution during an 18-month period, we identified 49 patients who subsequently underwent surgery or cholangioscopic stone removal with proof of intrahepatic stones. Thirty-four of these patients also underwent ERCP; they made up our study population. All images were interpreted for the presence of bile duct stones: MRCP images were interpreted independently by two reviewers, and ERCP studies were interpreted by one reviewer who was unaware of the MRCP findings.
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of MRCP for detecting intrahepatic stones were 97% and 93%, respectively, whereas those of ERCP were 59% and 97%, respectively. MRCP showed a significantly higher sensitivity than ERCP in the diagnosis of intrahepatic stones (p < 0.001). We found no significant difference between MRCP and ERCP in sensitivity or specificity for detecting calculi in the common duct or gallbladder.
CONCLUSION: MRCP is a more effective diagnostic method than ERCP for the evaluation of intrahepatic stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the 318 patients who underwent MRCP examinations at our institution during an 18-month period, we identified 49 patients who subsequently underwent surgery or cholangioscopic stone removal with proof of intrahepatic stones. Thirty-four of these patients also underwent ERCP; they made up our study population. All images were interpreted for the presence of bile duct stones: MRCP images were interpreted independently by two reviewers, and ERCP studies were interpreted by one reviewer who was unaware of the MRCP findings.
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of MRCP for detecting intrahepatic stones were 97% and 93%, respectively, whereas those of ERCP were 59% and 97%, respectively. MRCP showed a significantly higher sensitivity than ERCP in the diagnosis of intrahepatic stones (p < 0.001). We found no significant difference between MRCP and ERCP in sensitivity or specificity for detecting calculi in the common duct or gallbladder.
CONCLUSION: MRCP is a more effective diagnostic method than ERCP for the evaluation of intrahepatic stones.