Magnetic resonance cholangiography versus ultrasound in the evaluation of the gallbladder

被引:15
|
作者
Calvo, MM
Bujanda, L
Heras, I
Calderon, A
Cabriada, JL
Orive, V
Martinez, A
Capelastegi, A
机构
[1] Galdakao Hosp, Dept Gastroenterol, Vizcaya, Spain
[2] Galdakao Hosp, Dept Radiol, Vizcaya, Spain
[3] Galdakao Hosp, OSATEK RM, Vizcaya, Spain
关键词
magnetic resonance cholangiography; ultrasonography; gallbladder;
D O I
10.1097/00004836-200203000-00007
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Ultrasonography (US) is currently the reference technique for evaluating gallbladder pathology. The aim of this study was to prospectively determine the diagnostic efficacy of magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRCP) in evaluating the gallbladder, as compared with US. The study included 80 patients (mean age, 69.3 years; male-to-female ration, 1.3:1) who underwent prospective US and MRCP; 5 patients in whom MRCP was contraindicated were excluded. In all cases, US was performed before MRCP. Ultrasound was the reference technique for evaluating MRCP sensitivity and specificity. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography provided good image quality in 65 patients (81.2%) and poor image quality in 15 (mostly because of poor patient cooperation). Artefacts did not influence visualization of the gallbladder or evaluation of the background pathology. The sensitivity of MRCP in diagnosing gallbladder stones (43 patients; 97.7%) was comparable to US (44 patients). In contrast, MRCP diagnosed biliary sludge or microlithiasis in 13 patients, versus 5 in the case of US. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is a good technique for diagnosing cholelithiasis and biliary sludge. However, its high cost, contraindications, and the need for patient cooperation limit the use of the technique in routine clinical gallbladder studies. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography could contribute to the diagnosis of microlithiasis, provided that future studies confirm its greater sensitivity versus US.
引用
收藏
页码:233 / 236
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] A comparative study of magnetic resonance cholangiography and direct cholangiography
    Alcaraz, MJ
    De la Morena, EJ
    Polo, A
    Ramos, A
    De la Cal, MA
    Mandly, AG
    REVISTA ESPANOLA DE ENFERMEDADES DIGESTIVAS, 2000, 92 (07) : 433 - 438
  • [12] Magnetic resonance cholangiography in children
    Metreweli, C
    So, NMC
    Chu, WCW
    Lam, WWM
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2004, 77 (924): : 1059 - 1064
  • [13] MAGNETIC-RESONANCE CHOLANGIOGRAPHY
    MEAKEM, TJ
    SCHNALL, MD
    GASTROENTEROLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1995, 24 (02) : 221 - 238
  • [14] MAGNETIC-RESONANCE CHOLANGIOGRAPHY
    SCHUSTER, DM
    PEDROSA, MC
    ROBBINS, AH
    ABDOMINAL IMAGING, 1995, 20 (04): : 353 - 356
  • [15] Magnetic resonance cholangiography in hepatolithiasis
    Kubo, S
    Hamba, H
    Hirohashi, K
    Kinoshita, H
    Lee, KC
    Yamazaki, O
    Nishio, H
    Yamada, R
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1997, 92 (04): : 629 - 632
  • [17] Accumulation of Bile in the Gallbladder: Evaluation by means of Serial Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Cholangiography with Gadolinium Ethoxybenzyl Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic Acid
    Tamada, Tsutomu
    Ito, Katsuyoshi
    Yasokawa, Kazuya
    Higaki, Atsushi
    Kanki, Akihiko
    Noda, Yasufumi
    Yamamoto, Akira
    GASTROENTEROLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2014, 2014
  • [18] Utility of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the evaluation of patients with gallstone pancreatitis.
    Magnuson, TH
    Duncan, MD
    Freeswick, PD
    Harmon, JW
    Bender, JS
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2000, 118 (04) : A1062 - A1062
  • [19] Laparoscopic injuries to the bile duct: Evaluation with magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRCP)
    Capiel, C
    21ST INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF RADIOLOGY, 2000, : 19 - 22
  • [20] Comparison of magnetic resonance cholangiography and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography in the evaluation of bile duct strictures after cholecystectomy
    Chaudhary, A
    Negi, SS
    Puri, SK
    Narang, P
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2002, 89 (04) : 433 - 436