Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao IRIS - Università de...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Diagnostic accuracy of MRCP in choledocholithiasis.

Authors: Guarise A; Baltieri S; Mainardi P; FACCIOLI, Niccolò;

Diagnostic accuracy of MRCP in choledocholithiasis.

Abstract

To evaluate the accuracy of MRCP in diagnosing choledocholithiasis considering Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as the gold standard. To compare the results achieved during the first two years of use (1999-2000) of Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis with those achieved during the following two years (2001-2002) in order to establish the repeatability and objectivity of MRCP results.One hundred and seventy consecutive patients underwent MRCP followed by ERCP within 72 h. In 22/170 (13%) patients ERCP was unsuccessful for different reasons. MRCP was performed using a 1.5 T magnet with both multi-slice HASTE sequences and thick-slice projection technique. Choledocholithiasis was diagnosed in the presence of signal void images in the dependent portion of the duct surrounded by hyperintense bile and detected at least in two projections. The MRCP results, read independently from the ERCP results, were compared in two different and subsequent periods.ERCP confirmed choledocholithiasis in 87 patients. In these cases the results of MRCP were the following: 78 true positives, 53 true negatives, 7 false positives, and 9 false negatives. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 90%, 88% and 89% respectively. After the exclusion of stones with diameters smaller than 6 mm, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 100%, 99% and 99%, respectively. MRCP accuracy was related to the size of the stones. There was no significant statistical difference between the results obtained in the first two-year period and those obtained in the second period.MRCP is sufficiently accurate to replace ERCP in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. The results are related to the size of stones. The use of well-defined radiological signs allows good diagnostic accuracy independent of the learning curve.

Country
Italy
Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde, Common Bile Duct, Male, Common Bile Duct Neoplasms, Reproducibility of Results, Constriction, Pathologic, Middle Aged, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Sensitivity and Specificity, Choledocholithiasis, Predictive Value of Tests, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Bile, Humans, False Positive Reactions, Female, False Negative Reactions, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    24
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
24
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!