Title: MRCP and Its Role in the Evaluation of Pancreaticobiliary Tract in Gall Stone Disease at a Tertiary Care Centre in North India
Authors: S N Singh, Abhishek Dwivedi, P K Dhagat, Sumeet Arora, Rajat Sharma, Shalini Singh, Megha Jain, Abhishek Purkayastha
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v4i12.57
Abstract
MRCP (Magnetic Resonance Cholangio Pancreatography) is a widely used investigation and is now firmly established in the evaluation of the biliary and pancreatic ducts. It helps in the assessment of causes of biliary abnormalities and can be useful in the evaluation of the pancreatic duct without the invasiveness of an endoscopic procedure.
In view of limitation of US and CT and invasiveness of PTC and ERCP there is continuous need for a non invasive high resolution modality.
Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of MRCP with its ultrasound correlation.
Methods: This study included 50 patients who had undergone MRCP prior to cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. There were 23 males and 27 female patients
Result: The majority of patient presented with epigastric pain & vomiting. The percentage rate of detection of gall stones and CBD stones were 89.75% and 76.19% on USG respectively. The same for MRCP was 87.18% and 95.24% respectively. MRCP showed high positive predictive value in diagnosing choledocholithiasis and diagnosing hepatobiliary lesions.
Conclusion: MRCP now readily, easily and accurately permits the study and evaluation of anatomy and pathology of the pancreaticobiliary tree. It is non invasive and non ionizing imaging method. Our results states that preoperative MRCP had a concrete safeguarding effect on laparoscopic cholecystectomy and deserves promotion.
Keywords: biliary obstruction, Ultrasound, intraductal calculi.
References
1. Magnuson TH, Bender JS, Duncan MD. Utility of MR Cholangiopancreatography in the evaluation of biliary obstruction. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 189: 63-72.
2. Reinhold C, Taorel P, Bret P et al. Choledocholithiasis: Evaluation of MR Cholangiopancreatography for diagnosis. Radiology1998; 209:435-442.
3. Baron RL. Common Bile Duct Stones: Reassessment criteria for CT Diagnosis. Radiology 1987; 162:419-424.
4. Baron RL. Computed Tomography of the biliary tree. RCNA 1991; 29(6): 1235-1250.
5. Dawson P, Adam A, Benjamin IS. Intravenous Cholangiography revisited. Clinical Radiology 1993; 47:223-225.
6. Patel JC, Mc Cinnis, Bagely GS et al.The role of Intravenous cholangiography in pre operative assessment for laproscopic cholecystectomy.Br J Radiology 1993; 66:1125-1127.
7. Wallener BK, Schumacher KA, Weidenmaier W, et al. Dilated Biliary tract: Evaluation with MR Cholangiography with a T2 weighted contrast enhanced fast sequence. Radiology 1991; 181:805-808.
8. David et al: Pitfalls in the interpretation of MR Cholangiopancreatography. AJR 1998; 170:1055-59.
9. Miyazaki T, Yamashita Y, Tsuchigame T, et al. MR cholangiopancreatography using HASTE (half-fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo) sequences. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996;166:1297-1303.
10. Laubenberger et al. Breathhold projection MRCP: A new method for examination of the bile and pancreatic ducts. Magn Reson Med 1995; 33:1823.
11. David et al: Pitfalls in the interpretation of MR Cholangiopancreatography. AJR 1998; 170:1055-59.
12. Prat F, Bou Jaoude J, Ink O, et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy for suspected choledocholithiasis in patients with and without stones. Am J Gastroenterol 1995;90:727-731.
13. Lightdale CJ. Indications, contraindica-tions and complications of endoscopic ultrasonography. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;43:S15-S18.
14. Outwater E, Miller L, Gordon S, et al. Non invasive 3-d cholangiography with MR imaging. [Abstract] Gastroenterology 1994;106:A374 .
15. Guibaud L, Bret PM, Reinhold C, et al. Bile duct obstruction and choledocho-lithiasis: diagnosis with MR cholangio-graphy. Radiology 1995;197: 109-115.
16. Fitoz S1, Erden A, Boruban S. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography of biliary system abnormalities in children. Clin Imaging. 2007 Mar-Apr;31(2):93-101.
17. Varghese JC, Liddell RP, Farrell MA, Murray FE, Osborne DH, Lee MJ.Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasound compared with direct cholangiography in the detection of choledocholithiasis.Clin Radiol. 2000 Jan;55(1):25-35. Erratum in: Clin Radiol 2000 Aug;55(8):657.
18. Ke ZW1, Zheng CZ, Li JH, Yin K, Hua JD. Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance cholangiography in patients with suspected common bile duct stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2003 Nov;2(4):576-80.
19. Zhang C, Yin M, Liu Q.The Guidance Impact of Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography on Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015 Aug 11. [Epub ahead of print]...
20. Ward WH1, Fluke LM, Hoagland BD, Zarow GJ, Held JM, Ricca RL. The Role of Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancrea-tography in the Diagnosis of Choledocho-lithiasis: Do Benefits Outweigh the Costs?. Am Surg. 2015 Jul;81(7):720-5.
21. Lin C1, Collins JN, Britt RC, Britt LD. Initial Cholecystectomy with Cholangio-graphy Decreases Length of Stay Comp-ared to Preoperative MRCP or ERCP in the Management of Choledocholithiasis. Am Surg. 2015 Jul;81(7):726-31.