MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций
Медицинская библиотека · Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas · 1999

Magnetic resonance study of the pancreatic duct.

Calvo M M, Calderón A, Heras I, Durán M, Orive V, Cabriada J, Astigarraga E

Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

AIM: to prospectively determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in the evaluation of the normal and diseased pancreatic duct.

METHODS

patients seen during a 6-month period with a diagnosis of biliary tract or pancreatic disease underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) after a previous MRCP. The pancreatic duct was evaluated with both techniques in 37 patients.

RESULTS

the pancreatic duct appeared normal in ERCP in 27 patients, and also appeared normal in MRCP in 25 of these patients (specificity 93%). ERCP showed moderate-severe pancreatic duct dilation in 8 patients, in whom the same diagnosis was reached with MRCP (sensitivity 100%). The causes of dilation were chronic pancreatitis (2 patients), pancreatic cancer (3 patients) and ampullary tumor (2 patients); in 1 patient the findings with both techniques were suggestive of neoplasm of the head of the pancreas or focal chronic pancreatitis. Pancreas divisum was diagnosed in 2 patients by both methods, and the predominant dorsal duct as well as the ventral duct were visualized by MRCP.

CONCLUSIONS

MRCP is an accurate technique for evaluating the normal or diseased pancreatic duct, and for determining the underlying disease.

Для цитирования: Calvo M M, Calderón A, Heras I, Durán M, Orive V, Cabriada J, Astigarraga E. Magnetic resonance study of the pancreatic duct.. Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas. 1999.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.