Endosonography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in diagnosing extrahepatic biliary obstruction.

IF 0.7
Igor Tozzi di Angelo, Vlastimil Prochazka, Martin Holinka, Jana Zapletalova
{"title":"Endosonography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in diagnosing extrahepatic biliary obstruction.","authors":"Igor Tozzi di Angelo,&nbsp;Vlastimil Prochazka,&nbsp;Martin Holinka,&nbsp;Jana Zapletalova","doi":"10.5507/bp.2011.044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Endosonography (EUS) performed prior to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or surgery in patients with a low to moderate probability of choledocholithiasis can reduce morbidity, mortality and costs.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aimed at evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of EUS and transabdominal ultrasonography (TUS) compared to ERCP in a cohort of 100 patients diagnosed with extrahepatic biliary obstruction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>There were four working groups. The first group processed the initial data including history, physical examination and assessment of laboratory markers of cholestasis. The second group examined TUS. The third group examined the pancreas and biliary tree using EUS, always prior to ERCP. The fourth working group carried out ERCP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sensitivity and accuracy of EUS in the diagnosis of common bile duct dilatation were 84% and 83%, respectively, i.e. significantly higher (p=0.0001) than TUS (46% and 66%, respectively). The specificities of methods (82%, 91%) were not significantly different (p=0.218). The sensitivity and accuracy of EUS in the diagnosis of pathological content of the common bile duct were 88% and 92%, respectively, i.e. significantly higher (p<0.0001) than TUS (33% and 64%). The specificities of the methods (96%, 94%) were not significantly different (p=0.641). The incidence of choledocholithiasis in the high-risk group was significantly higher than in the moderate-risk group (p=0.012).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Radial EUS is a method with high sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. It should therefore be preferred to ERCP in patients with low or moderate risk of choledocholithiasis.</p>","PeriodicalId":520569,"journal":{"name":"Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia","volume":" ","pages":"339-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5507/bp.2011.044","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Objective: Endosonography (EUS) performed prior to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or surgery in patients with a low to moderate probability of choledocholithiasis can reduce morbidity, mortality and costs.

Aims: This study aimed at evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of EUS and transabdominal ultrasonography (TUS) compared to ERCP in a cohort of 100 patients diagnosed with extrahepatic biliary obstruction.

Methods: There were four working groups. The first group processed the initial data including history, physical examination and assessment of laboratory markers of cholestasis. The second group examined TUS. The third group examined the pancreas and biliary tree using EUS, always prior to ERCP. The fourth working group carried out ERCP.

Results: The sensitivity and accuracy of EUS in the diagnosis of common bile duct dilatation were 84% and 83%, respectively, i.e. significantly higher (p=0.0001) than TUS (46% and 66%, respectively). The specificities of methods (82%, 91%) were not significantly different (p=0.218). The sensitivity and accuracy of EUS in the diagnosis of pathological content of the common bile duct were 88% and 92%, respectively, i.e. significantly higher (p<0.0001) than TUS (33% and 64%). The specificities of the methods (96%, 94%) were not significantly different (p=0.641). The incidence of choledocholithiasis in the high-risk group was significantly higher than in the moderate-risk group (p=0.012).

Conclusion: Radial EUS is a method with high sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. It should therefore be preferred to ERCP in patients with low or moderate risk of choledocholithiasis.

超声与内窥镜逆行胆管造影诊断肝外胆道阻塞的比较。
目的:中低概率胆总管结石患者在内镜逆行胆管造影(ERCP)或手术前行内镜超声检查(EUS)可降低发病率、死亡率和费用。目的:本研究旨在评价EUS和经腹超声检查(TUS)与ERCP在100例肝外胆道梗阻患者中的敏感性和特异性。方法:共设4个工作组。第一组处理初始数据,包括病史、体格检查和胆汁淤积实验室标志物评估。第二组检查TUS。第三组使用EUS检查胰腺和胆道树,总是在ERCP之前。第四工作组进行了ERCP。结果:EUS诊断胆总管扩张的敏感性和准确性分别为84%和83%,显著高于TUS(分别为46%和66%)(p=0.0001)。两种方法的特异性(82%、91%)差异无统计学意义(p=0.218)。EUS诊断胆总管病理内容的敏感性和准确性分别为88%和92%,显著高于对照组(p结论:放射状EUS是一种敏感性高、特异性强、阳性和阴性预测值高的方法。因此,对于胆总管结石低或中度风险的患者,应优先选择ERCP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书