Vido I, Hundeshagen H, Becker H, Schmidt F W
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1975 Jan 24;100(4):129-32. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1106182.
Results of laparoscopy and scintigraphy were compared and contrasted with ultimate clinical diagnosis in 94 patients with chronic hepatitis or liver cirrhosis and 38 with liver tumours. The findings agreed in 77 cases of chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis and 33 of liver tumour. In the remainder either laparoscopy or scintigraphy gave the wrong results. In one case each of cirrhosis and liver metluded that (1) laparoscopy and scintigraphy are methods complementing but not replacing other clinical tests; (2) if diffuse liver disease is suspected clinically the diagnosis can essentially be done only by laparoscopy and selective biopsy or blind liver biopsy but not scintigraphy; (o) if a circumscribed condition is suspected, scintigraphy is among the most important screening tests, but cannot replace laparoscopy, biopsy or angiography for confirming the diagnosis; (4) liver scan is an important method, of little stress to the patient, in following the progress of chronic hepatitis and liver cirrhosis, additional to clinical examination, enzyme tests, laparoscopy and histology.
