Anatomical Variations of the Common Bile Duct by Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography, Is it different?
Saleh, A., Gomaa, A., Hassan, E., Abd ElFattah, A., Ahmed, T. (2024). Anatomical Variations of the Common Bile Duct by Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography, Is it different?. EKB Journal Management System, (), 1-9. doi: 10.21608/fumj.2024.250219.1280
Ahmed Mohamed Saleh; Ahmed Ali Gomaa; Essam Ali Hassan; Abd Allah Abbas Abd ElFattah; tarek Ibrahim Ahmed. "Anatomical Variations of the Common Bile Duct by Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography, Is it different?". EKB Journal Management System, , , 2024, 1-9. doi: 10.21608/fumj.2024.250219.1280
Saleh, A., Gomaa, A., Hassan, E., Abd ElFattah, A., Ahmed, T. (2024). 'Anatomical Variations of the Common Bile Duct by Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography, Is it different?', EKB Journal Management System, (), pp. 1-9. doi: 10.21608/fumj.2024.250219.1280
Saleh, A., Gomaa, A., Hassan, E., Abd ElFattah, A., Ahmed, T. Anatomical Variations of the Common Bile Duct by Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography, Is it different?. EKB Journal Management System, 2024; (): 1-9. doi: 10.21608/fumj.2024.250219.1280

Anatomical Variations of the Common Bile Duct by Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography, Is it different?

Fayoum University Medical Journal
Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 22 May 2024  XML PDF (319.1 K)
Document Type: Full Length research Papers
DOI: 10.21608/fumj.2024.250219.1280
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Ahmed Mohamed Saleh email 1; Ahmed Ali Gomaa2; Essam Ali Hassan3; Abd Allah Abbas Abd ElFattah4; tarek Ibrahim Ahmed5
1tropical medicine department, faculty of medicine, Fayoum university, Fayoum, Egypt
2Tropical medicine department, Fayoum university, Fayoum, Egypt
3Tropical medicine department, Fayoum university, Fayoum, Egyptdicine fayoum university
4Radiology department, Fayoum university, Fayoum, Egypt
5Internal medicine department, Fayoum university, Fayoum, Egypt
Abstract
Abstract:
Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), computerized tomography (CT) cholangiography, and/or intraoperative cholangiography can all be used to identify biliary anatomy. There is a scarce of studies that compare ERCP and MRCP in detection of anatomical variations. Aim of the study: to compare ERCP Findings versus MRCP in detection of anatomical variations of the biliary tree in Egyptian population. subjects and Methods: The study was a prospective descriptive comparative study that included fifty patients submitted to ERCP in Fayoum University Hospital from February 2020 to September 2021. Results: According to Huang classification, type A1 is found in 36% (n=18), type A2 in 28% (n=14), type A3 in 24% (n=12), type A4 in 8%(n=4) and A5 in 4% (n-2) with no statistical differences between MRCP and ERCP in detection of variations. Conclusion: Type A1 variant by Huang classification is the commonest anatomical finding. MRCP is a sensitive and specific modality in detecting biliary anatomical variations Key words: ERCP; MRCP; Biliary anatomy.
Keywords
ERCP; MRCP; Biliary anatomy
Statistics
Article View: 27
PDF Download: 18