MR imaging and CT of the biliary tract

Radiographics

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1669-1688

  Yeh, Benjamin M ^a   Liu, Peter S ^c   Soto, Jorge A ^d   Corvera, Carlos A ^b   Hussain, Hero K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HOSPITALS   (United States)

^d BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BILIARY TRACT DISEASE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HEPATOBILIARY SYSTEM; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; METHODOLOGY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY;

BILIARY TRACT; BILIARY TRACT DISEASES; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77449160819     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.296095514     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Hekimoglu K, Ustundag Y, Dusak A, et al. MRCP vs. ERCP in the evaluation of biliary pathologies: review of current literature. J Dig Dis 2008;9:162-169.
2. Soto JA, Barish MA, Yucel EK, Siegenberg D, Ferrucci JT, Chuttani R. Magnetic resonance cholangiography: comparison with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastroenterology 1996; 110:589-597.
3. Barish MA, Yucel EK, Ferrucci JT. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. N Engl J Med 1999;341:258-264.
4. Nandalur KR, Hussain HK, Weadock WJ, et al. Possible biliary disease: diagnostic performance of highspatial-resolution isotropic 3D T2-weighted MRCP. Radiology 2008;249:883-890.
5. Choi SH, Han JK, Lee JM, et al. Differentiating malignant from benign common bile duct stricture with multiphasic helical CT. Radiology 2005;236: 178-183.
6. Park MS, Kim TK, Kim KW, et al. Differentiation of extrahepatic bile duct cholangiocarcinoma from benign stricture: findings at MRCP versus ERCP. Radiology 2004;233:234-240.
7. Keogan MT, Seabourn JT, Paulson EK, McDermott VG, Delong DM, Nelson RC. Contrast-enhanced CT of intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinoma: delay time for optimal imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:1493-1499.
8. Irie H, Honda H, Kuroiwa T, et al. Pitfalls in MR cholangiopancreatographic interpretation. RadioGraphics 2001;21:23-37.
9. Romagnuolo J, Bardou M, Rahme E, Joseph L, Reinhold C, Barkun AN. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected biliary disease. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:547-557.
10. Stott MA, Farrands PA, Guyer PB, Dewbury KC, Browning JJ, Sutton R. Ultrasound of the common bile duct in patients undergoing cholecystectomy. J Clin Ultrasound 1991;19:73-76.
11. Sugiyama M, Atomi Y. Endoscopic ultrasonography for diagnosing choledocholithiasis: a prospective comparative study with ultrasonography and computed tomography. Gastrointest Endosc 1997;45: 143-146.
12. Majeed AW, Ross B, Johnson AG, Reed MW. Common duct diameter as an independent predictor of choledocholithiasis: is it useful? Clin Radiol 1999;54: 170-172.
13. Halefoglu AM. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: a useful tool in the evaluation of pancreatic and biliary disorders. World J Gastroenterol 2007;13:2529-2534.
14. Tsai HM, Lin XZ, Chen CY, Lin PW, Lin JC. MRI of gallstones with different compositions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:1513-1519.
15. Baron RL, Shuman WP, Lee SP, et al. MR appearance of gallstones in vitro at 1.5 T: correlation with chemical composition. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1989; 153:497-502.
16. Chan WC, Joe BN, Coakley FV, et al. Gallstone detection at CT in vitro: effect of peak voltage setting. Radiology 2006;241:546-553.
17. McMahon CJ. The relative roles of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasound in diagnosis of malignant common bile duct strictures: a critically appraised topic. Abdom Imaging 2008;33:10-13.
18. Fulcher AS, Turner MA, Capps GW, Zfass AM, Baker KM. Half-Fourier RARE MR cholangiopancreatography: experience in 300 subjects. Radiology 1998;207:21-32.
19. Anderson SW, Lucey BC, Varghese JC, Soto JA. Accuracy of MDCT in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:174-180.
20. Neitlich JD, Topazian M, Smith RC, Gupta A, Burrell MI, Rosenfield AT. Detection of choledocholithiasis: comparison of unenhanced helical CT and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Radiology 1997;203:753-757.
21. Anderson SW, Rho E, Soto JA. Detection of biliary duct narrowing and choledocholithiasis: accuracy of portal venous phase multidetector CT. Radiology 2008;247:418-427.
22. Cabada Giadas T, Sarria Octavio de Toledo L, Martinez-Berganza Asensio MT, et al. Helical CT cholangiography in the evaluation of the biliary tract: application to the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. Abdom Imaging 2002;27:61-70.
23. Wallner BK, Schumacher KA, Weidenmaier W, Friedrich JM. Dilated biliary tract: evaluation with MR cholangiography with a T2-weighted contrast-enhanced fast sequence. Radiology 1991;181:805-808.
24. Choi JY, Lee JM, Lee JY, et al. Navigator-triggered isotropic three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis of malignant biliary obstructions: comparison with direct cholangiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27: 94-101.
25. Zhang J, Israel GM, Hecht EM, Krinsky GA, Babb JS, Lee VS. Isotropic 3D T2-weighted MR cholangiopancreatography with parallel imaging: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1564-1570.
26. Masui T, Katayama M, Kobayashi S, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: comparison of respiratory-triggered three-dimensional fastrecovery fast spin-echo with parallel imaging technique and breath-hold half-Fourier two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo technique. Radiat Med 2006;24:202-209.
27. Vitellas KM, Keogan MT, Spritzer CE, Nelson RC. MR cholangiopancreatography of bile and pancreatic duct abnormalities with emphasis on the singleshot fast spin-echo technique. RadioGraphics 2000; 20:939-957.
28. Hosseinzadeh K, Furlan A, Almusa O. 2D thick-slab MR cholangiopancreatography: does parallel imaging with sensitivity encoding improve image quality and duct visualization? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:W327-W334.
29. Sodickson A, Mortele KJ, Barish MA, Zou KH, Thibodeau S, Tempany CM. Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 2006;238:549-559.
30. Yeh BM, Breiman RS, Taouli B, Qayyum A, Roberts JP, Coakley FV. Biliary tract depiction in living potential liver donors: comparison of conventional MR, mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced excretory MR, and multi-detector row CT cholangiography- initial experience. Radiology 2004;230:645-651.
31. Marckmann P, Skov L, Rossen K, et al. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: suspected causative role of gadodiamide used for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Soc Nephrol 2006;17: 2359-2362.
32. Anderson SW, Zajick D, Lucey BC, Soto JA. 64-detector row computed tomography: an improved tool for evaluating the biliary and pancreatic ducts? Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2007;36:258-271.
33. Breiman RS, Coakley FV, Webb EM, et al. CT cholangiography in potential liver donors: effect of premedication with intravenous morphine on biliary caliber and visualization. Radiology 2008;247:733-737.
34. Schroeder T, Radtke A, Debatin JF, et al. Contrastenhanced multidetector-CT cholangiography after living donor liver transplantation. Hepatogastroenterology 2007;54:1176-1180.
35. Schroeder T, Radtke A, Kuehl H, Debatin JF, Malago M, Ruehm SG. Evaluation of living liver donors with an all-inclusive 3D multi-detector row CT protocol. Radiology 2006;238:900-910.
36. Wang ZJ, Yeh BM, Roberts JP, Breiman RS, Qayyum A, Coakley FV. Living donor candidates for right hepatic lobe transplantation: evaluation at CT cholangiography-initial experience. Radiology 2005; 235:899-904.
37. Radtke A, Sgourakis G, Sotiropoulos GC, et al. Hepatic hilar and sectorial vascular and biliary anatomy in right graft adult live liver donor transplantation. Transplant Proc 2008;40:3147-3150.
38. Yeh BM, Coakley FV, Westphalen AC, et al. Predicting biliary complications in right lobe liver transplant recipients according to distance between donor's bile duct and corresponding hepatic artery. Radiology 2007;242:144-151.
39. Sajjad Z, Oxtoby J, West D, Deakin M. Biliary imaging by spiral CT cholangiography: a retrospective analysis. Br J Radiol 1999;72:149-152.
40. Miller GA, Yeh BM, Breiman RS, Roberts JP, Qayyum A, Coakley FV. Use of CT cholangiography to evaluate the biliary tract after liver transplantation: initial experience. Liver Transpl 2004;10:1065.
41. Stockberger SM, Sherman S, Kopecky KK. Helical CT cholangiography. Abdom Imaging 1996;21: 98-104.
42. Lell MM, Anders K, Uder M, et al. New techniques in CT angiography. RadioGraphics 2006;26(suppl 1):S45-S62.
43. Van Hoe L, Mermuys K, Vanhoenacker P. MRCP pitfalls. Abdom Imaging 2004;29:360-387.
44. Kim HC, Yang DM, Jin W, et al. Multiplanar reformations and minimum intensity projections using multi-detector row CT for assessing anomalies and disorders of the pancreaticobiliary tree. World J Gastroenterol 2007;13:4177-4184.
45. Mallouhi A, Schocke M, Judmaier W, et al. 3D MR angiography of renal arteries: comparison of volume rendering and maximum intensity projection algorithms. Radiology 2002;223:509-516.
46. Baskaran V, Pereles FS, Nemcek AA Jr, et al. Gadolinium-enhanced 3D MR angiography of renal artery stenosis: a pilot comparison of maximum intensity projection, multiplanar reformatting, and 3D volume-rendering postprocessing algorithms. Acad Radiol 2002;9:50-59.