Incidentally detected biliary ductal dilatation on contrast-enhanced CT: what is the incidence of occult obstructing malignancy?

Clinical predictors of significant findings on EUS for the evaluation of incidental common bile duct dilation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although EUS is highly accurate for the evaluation of common bile duct (CBD) dilation, the yield of EUS in patients with incidental CBD dilation is unclear.

METHODS

Serial patients undergoing EUS for incidental, dilated CBD (per radiologist, minimum of >6 mm objectively) from 2 academic medical centers without active pancreaticobiliary disease or significantly elevated liver function test results were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of EUS with significant findings and a novel prediction model was derived from one center, internally validated with bootstrapping, and externally validated at the second center.

RESULTS

Of 375 patients evaluated, 31 (8.3%) had significant findings, including 26 choledocholithiasis, 1 ampullary adenoma, and 1 pancreatic mass. Predictors of significant findings with EUS included age of ≥70 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-10.0), non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain (OR, 6.1; 95% CI, 2.3-17.3), CBD diameter of ≥15 mm or ≥17 mm with cholecystectomy (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 2.7-18.7), and prior ERCP (OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 2.1-22.5). A point-based novel clinical prediction model was created: age of ≥70 years = 1, non-biliary-type abdominal pain without chronic pain = 2, prior ERCP = 2, and CBD dilation = 2. A score of <1 had 93% (development) and 100% (validation) sensitivity and predicted a <2% chance of having a significant finding in both cohorts while excluding the need for EUS in ∼30% of both cohorts. Conversely, a score of ≥4 was >90% specific for the presence of significant pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than 10% of patients undergoing EUS for incidental CBD dilation had pathologic findings. This novel, externally validated, clinical prediction model may reduce low-yield, invasive evaluation in nearly one-third of patients.

Evaluation of three-dimensional dual-energy CT cholangiopancreatography image quality in patients with pancreatobiliary dilatation: Comparison with conventional single-energy CT

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate three-dimensional (3D) negative-contrast CT cholangiopancreatography (nCTCP) image quality using dual-energy CT (DECT) with iterative reconstruction (IR) technique in patients with pancreatobiliary dilatation compared with single-energy CT (SECT).

Methods

Of the patients, 67 and 56 underwent conventional SECT (SECT set) and DECT with IR technique (DECT set), respectively. All patients were retrospectively analyzed during the portal phase to compare objective image quality and other data including patient demographics, hepatic and pancreatic parenchymal enhancement, noise, and attenuation difference (AD) between dilated ducts and enhanced hepatic parenchyma, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and CT volume dose index (CTDIvol). Two radiologists used the five-point Likert scale to evaluate the subjective image quality of 3D nCTCP regarding image noise, sharpness of dilated ducts, and overall image quality. Statistical analyses used the Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

No significant difference in patient demographics in either CT set was showed during objective evaluation (p > 0.05). However, higher hepatic and pancreatic parenchymal enhancement, AD, SNR, and CNR and lower hepatic and pancreatic noise (p < 0.005) as well as CTDIvol (p = 0.005) on DECT than on SECT were observed. Higher mean grades on DECT than on SECT were showed for image noise (4.65 vs 3.92), sharpness of dilated ducts (4.52 vs 3.94), and overall image quality (4.45 vs 3.91; p < 0.001), respectively during subjective evaluation.

Conclusion

A higher overall image quality and lower radiation dose on 3D nCTCP can be obtained by DECT with IR technique than with conventional SECT in patients with pancreatobiliary dilatation.

Recommendations for the Management of Incidental Hepatobiliary Findings in Adults: Endorsement and Adaptation of the 2017 and 2013 ACR Incidental Findings Committee White Papers by the Canadian Association of Radiologists Incidental Findings Working Group

The Canadian Association of Radiologists Incidental Findings Working Group consists of both academic subspecialty and general radiologists and is tasked with adapting and expanding upon the American College of Radiology incidental findings white papers to more closely apply to Canadian practice patterns, particularly more comprehensively dealing with the role of ultrasound and pursuing more cost-effective approaches to the workup of incidental findings without compromising patient care. Presented here are the 2020 Canadian guidelines for the management of hepatobiliary incidental findings. Topics covered include initial assessment of hepatic steatosis and cirrhosis, the workup of incidental liver masses identified on ultrasound and computed tomography (with algorithms presented), incidental gallbladder findings (wall thickening, calcification, and polyps), and management of incidental biliary dilatation.