The Diagnostic Yield of Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in the Setting of Acute Pancreaticobiliary Disease – A Single Center Experience

Link to article at PubMed

Can Assoc Radiol J. 2021 May 24:8465371211013786. doi: 10.1177/08465371211013786. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To discern whether preceding ultrasound (US) results, patient demographics and biochemical markers can be implemented as predictors of an abnormal Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) study in the context of acute pancreaticobiliary disease.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed assessing US results, age, gender, elevated lipase and biliary enzymes for consecutive patients who underwent an urgent MRCP following an initial US for acute pancreaticobiliary disease between January 2017-December 2018. Multivariable binary logistic regression models were constructed to assess for predictors of clinically significant MRCPs, and discrepant US/MRCP results.

RESULTS: A total of 155 patients (mean age 56, 111 females) were included. Age (OR 1.03, P < 0.05), hyperlipasemia (OR 5.33, P < 0.05) and a positive US (OR 40.75, P < 0.05) were found to be independent predictors for a subsequent abnormal MRCP. Contrarily, gender and elevated biliary enzymes were not reliable predictors of an abnormal MRCP, or significant MRCP/US discrepancies. Of 66 cases (43%) of discordant US/MRCPs, half had clinically significant discrepant findings such as newly discovered choledocholithiasis and pancreaticobiliary neoplasia. Age was the sole predictor for a significant US/MRCP discrepancy, with 2% increase in the odds of a significant discrepancy per year of increase in age.

CONCLUSION: An abnormal US, hyperlipasemia and increased age serve as predictors for a subsequent abnormal MRCP, as opposed to gender and biliary enzyme elevation. Age was the sole predictor of a significant US/MRCP discrepancy that provided new information which significantly impacted subsequent management. In the remaining cases, however, MRCP proved useful in reaffirming the clinical diagnosis and avoiding further investigations.

PMID:34024155 | DOI:10.1177/08465371211013786

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *