Detection of choledocholithiasis: Comparison of unenhanced helical CT and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Radiology

Volumn 203, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 753-757

  Neitlich, Jeffrey D ^a   Topazian, Mark ^a   Smith, Robert C ^a   Gupta, Amit ^a   Burrell, Morton I ^a   Rosenfield, Arthur T ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Bile ducts, calculi; Bile ducts, CT; Computed tomography (CT), comparative studies; Computed tomography (CT), helical; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BILE DUCT DILATATION; COMMON BILE DUCT STONE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0030928318     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiology.203.3.9169700     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Barakos JA, Ralls PW, Lapin SA, et al. Cholelithiasis: evaluation with CT. Radiology 1987; 162:415-418.
2. Baron RL. Gallstone characterization: the role of imaging. Semin Roentgenol 1991; 26:216-225.
3. Brink JA, Kammer B, Mueller PR, Balfe DM, Prien EL, Ferrucci JT. Prediction of gallstone composition: synthesis of CT and radiographic features in vitro. Radiology 1994; 190:69-75.
4. Brakel K, Lameris JS, Nijs HG, Terpstra OT, Steen G, Blijenberg BC. Predicting gallstone composition with CT: in vivo and in vitro analysis. Radiology 1990; 174:337-341.
5. Baron RL. Common bile duct stones: reassessment of criteria for CT diagnosis. Radiology 1987; 162:419-424.
6. Pasanen P, Partanen P, Pikkarainen P, et al. Ultrasonography, CT and ERCP in the diagnosis of choledochal stones. Acta Radiol 1992; 33:53-56.
7. Baron RL, Stanley RJ, Lee JK, et al. A prospective comparison of the evaluation of biliary obstruction using computed tomography and ultrasonography. Radiology 1982; 145:91-98.
8. Mitchell SE, Clark RA. A comparison of computed tomography and sonography in choledocholithiasis. AJR 1984; 142:729-733.
9. Jeffrey RB, Federle MP, Laing FC, Wall S, Rego J, Moss AA. Computed tomography of choledocholithiasis. AJR 1983; 140:1179-1183.
10. Shanser JD, Korobkin M, Goldberg HI, Rohlfing BM. Computed tomographic diagnosis of obstructive jaundice in the absence of intrahepatic ductal dilatation. AJR 1978; 131:389-392.
11. Santos CC, Shea WJ Jr, Goldberg HI. Evaluation of common bile duct diameter using high resolution computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1986; 10:424-427.
12. Kramer MS, Feinstein AR. Clinical biostatistics: LIV - the biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981; 29:111-123.
13. Dwyer AJ. Matchmaking and McNemar in the comparison of diagnostic modalities. Radiology 1991; 178:328-330.
14. Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for fates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley, 1981; 13-15.
15. Smith RC, Verga M, McCarthy S, Rosenfield AT. Diagnosis of acute flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT. AJR 1996; 166:97-101.
16. Guibaud L, Bret PM, Reinhold C, Atri M, Barkun AN. Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: value of MR cholangiography. AJR 1994; 163:847-850.
17. Chan YL, Chan AC, Lam WW, et al. Choledocholithiasis: comparison of MR cholangiography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. Radiology 1996; 200:85-89.