Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2009 Oct;100(5):341-8.

Magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones: a prospective comparative study

Affiliations
  • PMID: 19910887
Comparative Study

Magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones: a prospective comparative study

M G Scaffidi et al. Minerva Med. 2009 Oct.

Abstract

Aim: As it is a non-invasive method, magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRCP) has almost completely replaced endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) in the diagnosis of pancreato-biliary diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRCP in diagnosis of choledocholithiasis using ERCP/endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) as gold standard.

Methods: For this study 140 individuals, suspected for lithiasis of the common bile duct (CBD), were enrolled. After a clinical and biochemical evaluation, patients underwent upper abdominal ultrasonography, then MRCP and diagnostic and/or operative ERCP.

Results: Only 120 out of 140 patients completed the study. MRCP diagnosed lithiasis of CBD in 84. ERCP confirmed the lithiasis in 73/84 patients who were submitted to ES. Eleven were negative after ES. ERCP documented stones in 10 patients among the 36 negative at MRCP; stones were detected only in four patients after ES. In 26 out of 36 patients negative at MRCP, ERCP confirmed this response: only 12 out of 26 patients underwent ES. The sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, PPV and NPV of MRCP were: 88%, 72%, 83%, 87%, 72%.

Conclusions: As the MRCP diagnostic yield is still limited with small stones, the question of which patient is the best candidate to ERCP/ES is still unsolved.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources