Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Title of the article: Role of MRCP in hepatobiliary pathology in correlation with ERCP. Aim: To determine diagnostic accuracy of MRCP as compared to ERCP for evaluating biliary duct disorders using the specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive values. Patients and methods: From January 2010 to July 2016, 168 patients with suspected biliary pathology were included in this prospective and retrospective observational study. MRCP was performed prior to ERCP in all the patients included in this study. Results: MRCP had a 94.09% sensitivity , 94.03 % specificity ,91.30% positive predictive value 95.96 % negative predictive value (NPV) and 94 % accuracy rates in diagnosing biliary calculus. MRCP had a 92.31% sensitivity , 95.35%, specificity , 85.71% positive predictive value 97.62% negative predictive value (NPV) and 94.64% accuracy rates in diagnosing tumours/cyst MRCP had a 74.51 % sensitivity , 97.44 %specificity , 92.68%, positive predictive value 89.76%negative predictive value (NPV) and 90.48%, accuracy rates in diagnosing tumours/cyst other biliary disorders like CBD stricture, periampullary diverticulum and others. Conclusion: MRCP is an accurate investigation compared with diagnostic ERCP for the assessment of biliary pathologies.
Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography; Biliary ducts; Gallstone; Cholangiocarcinoma. Biliary strictures choledocholithiasis periampullary lesions.
Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography; Biliary ducts; Gallstone; Cholangiocarcinoma. Biliary strictures choledocholithiasis periampullary lesions.
| 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). | 0 | |
| 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). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 4 | |
| downloads | 6 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts