title: [Comparison of MR cholangiopancreatography and surgical diagnosis of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This work was done to compare the validity of various imaging methods, e.g. ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC), and, especially, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma.
  
  
  METHODS
  Sixty-five such patients who were operated and confirmed by pathology were used. Sixty patients had been examined by US; 52 by CT; 20 by ERCP; 9 by PTC and 20 by MRCP. The results of these imaging methods were compared with those of operative and pathological findings.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The diagnostic accuracy rates of site location were US 81.7%, CT 84.6%, ERCP 75.0%, PTC 88.9% and MRCP 100%, respectively. The quality diagnostic accuracy rates were US 73.3%, CT 82.7%, ERCP 75.0%, PTC 88.9% and MRCP 95.0%, respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  MRCP is superior to US, CT, ERCP and PTC not only in demonstrating the position but also the nature of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yet-sen University of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou 510120, China.
authors.forename: Jingxing
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Zhou
authors.forename: Biling
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Liang
authors.forename: Suiqiao
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Huang
authors.forename: Qingyu
authors.initials: Q
authors.lastname: Liu
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001650:Bile Duct Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D018281:Cholangiocarcinoma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D002760:Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D014463:Ultrasonography