Advertisement

Acta Endoscopica

, Volume 30, Supplement 2, pp 299–300 | Cite as

Apport de la bili-IRM dans le diagnostic de la lithiase cholédocienne

  • O. Vignaux
  • F. Charleux
  • P. Legmann
Diagnostic et Prise en Charge Thérapeutique de la Lithiase Cholédocienne
  • 27 Downloads

Conclusion

Malgré la bonne sensibilité et la bonne spécificité de la bili-IRM dans le diagnostic de la lithiase cholédocienne, il n'existe pas encore de consensus dans le rôle précis de cette technique diagnostique. Son caractère non invasif en fait l'examen de première intention en cas d'échec ou d'impossibilité techinque du cathétérisme rétrograde (anastomoses biliodigestives) [16] et chez les patients à «faible risque». Seulement 33% des patients qui ont un bilan hépatique perturbé ont une lithiase du cholédoque dans une série de patients ayant bénéficié d'une opacification peropératoire lors d'une cholécystectomie cœlioscopique [17]. Ce manque de spécificité conduit à un pourcentage non négligeable de l'ordre de 40 à 70% de CPRE négatives [18]. La bili-IRM pourrait permettre de réserver la CPRE aux patients qui bénéficieront d'un geste thérapeutique.

Mots-clés

imagerie par résonance magnétique lithiase biliaire 

Role of MR cholangiography in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis

Key-words

lithiasis MRCP 

Références

  1. 1.
    BARISH M., KENT T., YUCEL E., FERRUCI J.—Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography.N. Engl. J. Med., 1999,22, 341, 258–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    BARISH M.A., SOTO J.A.—MR Cholangiopancreatography: techniques and clinical applications.ARJ, 1997,169, 1295–1303.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    REINHOLD C., BRET P.M.—Current status of MR cholangiopancreatography.AJR, 1996,166, 1285–1295.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    LIU T.H., CONSORTI E.T., KAWASHIMA A., ERNST R.D., BLACK C.T., GREGER P.H.J.R., FISCHER R.P., MERCER D.W.—The efficacy of magnetic resonance cholangiography for the evaluation of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis before laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Am. J. Surg., 1999,178, 480–484.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    HOCHWALK S.N., DOBRYANSKY M.B.A., ROFSKY N.M., NAIK K.S., SHAMAMIAN P., COPPA G., MARCUS S.G. —Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography accurately predicts the presence or absence of choledocholithiasis.J. Gastrointest. Surg., 1998,2, 573–579.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    PAVONE P., LAGHI A., LOMANTO D., FIOCCA F., PANEBIANCO V., CATALANO C., MAZZOCHI P., PASSARIELLO R. —MR cholangiography in the evaluation of CBD stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surg. Endosc., 1997,11, 982–985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    REUTHER G., KIEFER B., TUCHMANN A.—Cholangiography before biliary surgery: single shot MR cholangiography versus intravenous cholangiography.Radiology, 1996,198, 561–566.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    DEMARTINES N., EISNER L., SCHNABEL K., FRIED R., ZUBER M., HARDER F.—Evaluation of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the management of bile duct stones.Arch. Surg., 2000,135, 148–152.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    VARGESE J.C., LIDDELL R.P., FARRELL M.A., MURRAY F.E., OSBORNE D.H., LEE M.J.—Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasound compared with direct cholangiography in the detection of choledocholithiasis.Clin. Radiol., 2000,55, 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    REINHOLD C., TAOUREL P., BRET P.M., CORTAS G.A., MEHTA S.N., BARKUN A.N., WANG L., TAFAZOLI F.— Choledocholithiasis: evaluation of MR cholangiography for diagnosis.Radiology, 1998,209, 435–434.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    BORASCHI P., NERI E., BRACCINI G., GIGONI R., CARAMELLA D., PERRI G., BARTOLOZZI C.—Choledocolithiasis: diagnostic accuracy of MR cholangiopancreatography. Three-year experience.Magn. Reson. Imaging., 1999,17, 1245–1253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    PAVONE P., LAGHI A., CATALANO C., PANEBIANCO V., FABIANO S., PASSARIELLO R.—MRI of the biliary and pancreatic ducts.Eur. Radiol., 1999, 1513–1522.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    GUIBAUD L., BRET P.M., REINHOLD C., MOSTAFA ATRI, BARKUN AN.—Bile Duct Obstruction and Choledocholithiasis: diagnosis with MR Cholangiography.Radiology, 1995,197, 109–115.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    VILGRAIN V.—Lithiasis of the common bile duct: ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance cholangiography. Indication and results.Gastroenterol. Clin. Biol., 1998,22 (suppl.5).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    BECKER C.D., GROSSHOLZ M., BECKER M., MENTHA G., DE PEYER R., TERRIER F.—Choledocholithiasis and bile duct stenosis: diagnostic accuracy of MR Cholangiopancreatography.Radiology, 1997,205, 523–530.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    VARGHESE J.C., FARELL M.A., COURTNEY G., OSBORNE H., MURRAY F.E., LEE M.J.—Role of MR cholangiopancreatography in patients with failed or inadequate ERCP.AJR, 1999,173, 1527–1533.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    CRANLEY B., LOGAN H.—Exploration of the common bile duct—the relevance of the clinical picture and the importance of preoperative cholangiography.Br. J. Surg., 1989,67, 869–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    PHILLIPS EH.—Controversies in the management of common bile duct calculi.Surg. Clin. North. Am., 1994,74, 931–948.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Service de Radiologie AHôpital CochinParisFrance

Personalised recommendations