Article Sidebar
Published:
Sep 20, 2017Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publishing rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
Read more here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Main Article Content
The role of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and diffusion-weighted imaging for the differential diagnosis of obstructive biliary disorders
Abstract
Background: Although endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is accepted as the gold standard, there is a place for magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis of obstructive biliary disorders.
Aim: To compare the findings of MRCP with ERCP in patients with obstructive biliary disorders and to investigate the diagnostic efficacy of MRCP combined with DWI.
Study design: Retrospective, analytic, cross-sectional study.
Methods: The MRCP images of 126 patients who underwent both MRCP and ERCP owing to biliary obstruction were reviewed. Nine patients were excluded because of incomplete diagnostic workup or a long period (>3 months) between MRCP and ERCP. Ninety-two patients underwent DWI, which was also evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MRCP and DWI were analysed.
Results: The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MRCP according to ERCP results as the gold standard was 97%, 71% and 93% for assessment of biliary dilatation; 100%, 94.7% and 97.5% for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis; 93.7%, 100% and 99% for the identification of benign strictures; 100%, 100% and 100% for the diagnosis of malignant tumours; and 100%, 100% and 100% for the detection of complicated hydatid cysts; respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of DWI for the diagnosis of malignant tumour was 100%. In the detection of choledocholithiasis, the sensitivity and specificity of DWI was 70.8% and 100%.
Conclusions: MRCP is an alternative, non-invasive, diagnostic modality, comparable with ERCP for the evaluation of pancreaticobiliary diseases. DWI can be helpful for diagnosis of choledocholithiasis and tumours.
