Download PDF
Endoscopy 2000; 32(1): 3-9
DOI: 10.1055/s-2000-86
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart ·New York

Extrahepatic Biliary Obstruction: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared With Endoscopic Ultrasonography

R. Materne 1 , B.  E. Van Beers 1 , J.  F. Gigot 2 , J. Jamart 3 , A. Geubel 4 , J. Pringot1 , P. Deprez 4
  • 1 Dept. of Radiology, Université Catholique de Louvain, St-Luc University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium
  • 2 Dept. of Surgery, Université Catholique de Louvain, St-Luc University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium
  • 3 Center of Biostatistics and Medical Documentation, Mont-Godinne University Hospital, Yvoir, Belgium
  • 4 Dept. of Gastroenterology, Université Catholique de Louvain, St-Luc University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 September 2003 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Background and Study Aims: The aim of this study was to compare prospectively the diagnostic efficacy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in extrahepatic biliary obstruction.

Patients and Methods: A total of 50 patients with suspected benign or malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction underwent MR imaging, including MR cholangiopancreatography, and EUS, within a median time delay of 1 day. The final diagnosis was established by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in 37 cases, intraoperative cholangiography in nine cases, and clinical and biochemical follow-up in four cases.

Results: In total, 33 patients had extrahepatic biliary obstruction, of benign origin in 21 cases and of malignant origin in 12 cases, whereas 17 had no evidence of obstruction. The sensitivity and specificity of MR imaging were 91 % and 94 %, respectively. There were one false-positive and three false-negative results, all related to choledochal sludge. The corresponding values for EUS were 97 % and 88 %. There were two false-positive results and one false-negative result. False-positive diagnoses were related to the presumed presence of biliary sludge and choledocholithiasis, whereas the false-negative diagnosis occurred in one patient with a final diagnosis of sludge. No significant difference in sensitivity and specificity was observed between the two imaging methods (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: In our study MR imaging was as accurate as EUS in the diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary obstruction.

References

  • 1 Hauer-Jensen M, Karesen R, Nygaard K, et al. Predictive ability of choledocholithiasis indicators. A prospective evaluation.  Ann Surg. 1985;  202 64-68
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Lacaine F, Corlette M B, Bismuth H. Preoperative evaluation of the risk of common bile duct stones.  Arch Surg. 1980;  115 1114-1116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Reiss R, Deutsch A A, Nudelman I, Kott I. Statistical value of various clinical parameters in predicting the presence of choledochal stones.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1984;  159 273-276
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Amouyal P, Amouyal G, Mompoint D, et al. Endosonography: promising method for diagnosis of extrahepatic cholestasis.  Lancet. 1989;  2 1195-1198
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Venu R P, Geenan J E, Toouli J, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Diagnosis of cholelithiasis in patients with normal gallbladder x-ray and ultrasound studies.  J Am Med Ass. 1983;  249 758-761
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Freeny P C, Ball T J. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous cholangiography (PTC) in the evaluation of suspected pancreatic carcinoma: diagnostic limitations and contemporary roles.  Cancer. 1981;  15 1666-1668
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Freeman M L, Nelson D B, Sherman S, et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy.  N Engl J Med. 1996;  335 909-918
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Erickson R A, Carlson B. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomies.  Gastroenterology. 1995;  109 252-263
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lai E C, Mok F P, Tan E S, et al. Endoscopic biliary drainage for severe acute cholangitis.  N Engl J Med. 1992;  326 1582-1586
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Amouyal P, Amouyal G, Levy P, et al. Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis by endoscopic ultrasonography.  Gastroenterology. 1994;  106 1062-1067
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Burtin P, Palazzo L, Canard J M, et al. Diagnostic strategies for extrahepatic cholestasis of indefinite origin: endoscopic or retrograde cholangiography? Results of a prospective study.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 349-355
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Prat F, Amouyal G, et al. Prospective controlled study of endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in patients with suspected common bile duct lithiasis.  Lancet. 1996;  347 75-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sugiyama M, Atomi Y. Endoscopic ultrasonography for diagnosing choledocholithiasis: a prospective comparative study with ultrasonography and computed tomography.  Gastrointest Endoscopy. 1997;  145 143-146
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Aubertin J M, Levoir D, Bouillot J L, et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography immediately prior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective evaluation.  Endoscopy. 1996;  28 667-673
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Norton S A, Alderson D. Prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the detection of bile duct stones.  Br J Surg. 1997;  84 1366-1369
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Legmann P, Vignaux O, Dousset B, et al. Pancreatic tumors: comparison of dual-phase helical CT and endoscopic sonography.  Am J Roentgenol. 1998;  170 1315-1322
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Brugge W R. Endoscopic ultrasonography: the current status.  Gastroenterology. 1998;  115 1577-1583
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Becker C D, Grossholz M, Becker M, et al. Choledocholithiasis and bile duct stenosis: diagnostic accuracy of MR cholangiopancreatography.  Radiology. 1997;  205 523-525
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chan Y L, Chan A CW, Lam W M, et al. Choledocholithiasis: comparison of MR cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.  Radiology. 1996;  200 85-89
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Guibaud L, Bret P M, Reinhold C, Atri M. Bile duct obstruction and choledocholithiasis: diagnosis with MR cholangiography.  Radiology. 1995;  197 109-115
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lee M G, Lee H J, Kim M H, et al. Extrahepatic biliary diseases: 3D MR cholangiopancreatography compared with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.  Radiology. 1997;  202 663-669
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Fulcher A S, Turner M A, Capps G W, et al. Half-Fourier RARE MR cholangiopancreatography: experience in 300 subjects.  Radiology. 1998;  207 21-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Catalano C, Pavone P, Laghi A, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: combination of MR imaging, MR angiography and MR cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis and assessment of resectability.  Eur J Radiol. 1998;  8 428-434
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Schwartz L H, Coakley F V, Sun Y, et al. Neoplastic pancreatobiliary duct obstruction: evaluation with breath-hold MR cholangiopancreatography.  Am J Roentgenol. 1998;  170 1491-1495
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Dancygier H, Nattermann C. The role of endoscopic ultrasonography in biliary tract disease: obstructive jaundice.  Endoscopy. 1994;  26 800-802
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Trede M, Rumstadt B, Wendl K, et al. Ultrafast magnetic resonance imaging improves the staging of pancreatic tumors.  Ann Surg. 1997;  226 393-407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sugiyama M, Atomi Y, Hachiya J. Magnetic resonance cholangiography using half-Fourier acquisition for diagnosing choledocholithiasis.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;  93 1886-1890
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 De Lédinghen V, Lecesne R, Raymond J M, et al. Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: EUS or magnetic resonance cholangiography? A prospective controlled study.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  49 26-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 McLean A, Fairclough P. Endoscopic ultrasound - current applications.  Clin Radiol. 1996;  51 83-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Bret P M, Reinhold C. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography.  Endoscopy. 1997;  29 472-486
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lee S P, Hayashi A, Kim Y S. Biliary sludge: curiosity or culprit?.  Hepatology. 1994;  20 523-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Müller M F, Meyenberger C, Bertschinger P, et al. Pancreatic tumors: evaluation with endoscopic US, CT, and MR imaging.  Radiology. 1994;  190 745-751
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Abboud P C, Malet P F, Berlin J A. Predictors of common bile duct stones prior to cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;  44 450-459
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Dahan P, Andant C, Lévy P, et al. Prospective evaluation of endoscopic ultrasonography and microscopic examination of duodenal bile in the diagnosis of cholecystolithiasis in 45 patients with normal conventional ultrasonography.  Gut. 1996;  38 277-281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Dill J E, Hill S, Callis J, et al. Combined endoscopic ultrasound and stimulated biliary drainage in cholecystitis and microlithiasis: diagnoses and outcomes.  Endoscopy. 1995;  27 424-427
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lee S P, Nicholls J F, Park H Z. Biliary sludge as a cause of acute pancreatitis.  N Engl J Med. 1992;  326 589-593
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Rösch T, Dittler H J, Fockens P, et al. Major complications of endoscopic ultrasonography: results of a survey of 42105 cases (abstract).  Gastrointest Endosc. 1993;  39 341
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Duprez P, Denis P, Devière J, et al. Complication rate in general practice of endosonography (abstract).  Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;  45 48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Acosta M J, Rossi R, Ledesma C L. The usefulness of stool screening for diagnosing choledocholithiasis in acute pancreatitis. A description of the technique.  Am J Dig Dis. 1977;  22 168-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

M.D. R. Materne

Dept. of Radiology St-Luc University Hospital

Avenue Hippocrate, 10

1200 Brussels

Belgium

Phone: +32-2-770-5074

Email: materne@rdgn.ucl.ac.be

      >