Comparison of preoperative evaluation of malignant low-level biliary obstruction using plain magnetic resonance and coronal liver acquisition with volume acceleration technique alone and in combination

Biliary Duct Dilatation: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Biliary duct dilatation is a common incidental finding in practice, but it is unlikely to indicate biliary obstruction in the absence of clinical symptoms or elevated levels on liver function tests (LFTs). However, the clinical presentation may be nonspecific, and LFTs may either be unavailable or difficult to interpret. The goal of this AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review is to highlight a series of topics fundamental to the management of biliary duct dilatation, providing consensus recommendations in a question-and-answer format. We start by covering a basic approach to interpreting LFT results, the strengths and weaknesses of the biliary imaging modalities, and how and where to measure the extrahepatic bile duct. Next, we define the criteria for biliary duct dilatation, including patients with prior cholecystectomy and advanced age, and discuss when and whether biliary duct dilatation can be attributed to papillary stenosis or sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Subsequently, we discuss two conditions in which the duct is pathologically dilated but not obstructed: congenital cystic dilatation (i.e., choledochal cyst) and intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct. Finally, we provide guidance regarding when to recommend obtaining additional imaging or testing, such as endoscopic ultrasound or ERCP, and include a discussion of future directions in biliary imaging.

Diagnosing malignant distal bile duct obstruction using artificial intelligence based on clinical biomarkers

Diagnosing distal bile duct obstruction remains challenging. This study aimed to examine the diagnostic ability of artificial intelligence (AI) based on clinical biomarkers in diagnosing malignant distal bile duct obstruction. A total of 206 patients with distal bile duct obstruction were included in this study. Clinical laboratory parameters were collected from the patients and evaluated using AI. All clinical parameters were input into the AI algorithm, and the AI value for malignant distal bile duct obstruction was calculated. The benign and malignant diagnostic capabilities of AI and other factors (alkaline phosphatase [ALP], intrahepatic bile duct [IHBD] diameters, and total bile duct [CBD] diameters) were compared. Benign and malignant bile duct obstruction were diagnosed in 142 and 64 patients, respectively. The median AI value of malignant distal bile duct obstruction was significantly greater than that of benign distal bile duct obstruction (0.991 vs. 0.002, p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of AI, ALP, IHBD diameter, and CBD diameter were 0.908, 0.795, 0.794, and 0.775, respectively. AI showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.1%, 87.2%, and 85.9%. AI-based on clinical biomarkers could serve as an auxiliary for diagnosing malignant bile duct obstruction.

Etiological Diagnosis of Linear-Array Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Distal Common Bile Duct Dilatation

ABSTRACT

The etiology of distal common bile duct (CBD) dilatation is complex. Linear-array endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) can not only visualize the distal and surrounding structures of the bile duct closely but also obtain pathological specimens by fine-needle aspiration, which provides an important basis for the diagnosis and differential diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of linear-array EUS in the etiology of distal CBD dilatation. Patients with distal CBD dilatation underwent linear-array EUS in the endoscopic center of The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University and Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan were collected from January 2015 to June 2019. The pathology results after surgery, endoscopic pathology, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results were retrospectively analyzed. The diagnostic accuracy of linear-array EUS and CT or MRI was compared. For the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, the diagnostic accuracy of linear-array EUS was 97.5%, which was significantly higher than that of MRI (86.36%) and CT (89.74) (P < 0.001 and 0.006, respectively). The diagnostic accuracy of linear-array EUS for periampullary tumors was 93.75%, which was higher than MRI and CT with an accuracy of 82.73% and 80.34% (P = 0.004 and 0.001, respectively). Linear EUS was effective for the etiological diagnosis of distal CBD dilatation.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers 2019: The 3rd English edition

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery launched the clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer) in 2007, then published the 2nd version in 2014.

METHODS

In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as Grade 1 (strong) or Grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (a) prophylactic treatment, (b) diagnosis, (c) biliary drainage, (d) surgical treatment, (e) chemotherapy, and (f) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded.

CONCLUSIONS

This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Jaundice

Jaundice is the end result of myriad causes, which makes the role of imaging in this setting particularly challenging. In the United States, the most common causes of all types of jaundice fall into four categories including hepatitis, alcoholic liver disease, blockage of the common bile duct by a gallstone or tumor, and toxic reaction to a drug or medicinal herb. Clinically, differentiating between the various potential etiologies of jaundice requires a detailed history, targeted physical examination, and pertinent laboratory studies, the results of which allow the physician to categorize the type of jaundice into mechanical or nonmechanical causes. Imaging modalities used to evaluate the jaundiced patient (all etiologies) include abdominal ultrasound (US), CT, MR cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic US. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Enhancing High Value Care in Gastroenterology Practice

BACKGROUNG & AIMS

The objective of this review is to identify common areas in gastroenterology practice where studies performed provide an opportunity for enhancing value or lowering costs.

METHODS

We provide examples of topics in gastroenterology where clinicians could enhance value by either using less invasive testing, choosing a single best test, or by using patient symptoms to guide additional testing.

RESULTS

The topics selected for review are selected in esophageal, pancreatic, and colorectal cancer; functional gastrointestinal diseases (irritable bowel syndrome, bacterial overgrowth, constipation); immune-mediated gastrointestinal diseases; and pancreaticobiliary pathology. We propose guidance to alter practice based on current evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

These studies support the need to review current practice and to continue performing research to further validate the proposed guidance to enhance value of care in gastroenterology and hepatology.