Suppr超能文献

剑桥评分系统在 ERCP 和 MRCP 中用于慢性胰腺炎的诊断是否相同?:需要修订标准。

Is Cambridge scoring in chronic pancreatitis the same using ERCP and MRCP?: A need for revision of standards.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, USA.

Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine, 550 N University Blvd Room 0663, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.

出版信息

Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021 Feb;46(2):647-654. doi: 10.1007/s00261-020-02685-2. Epub 2020 Aug 1.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Grading of chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a clinical and radiologic challenge. Retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) use a version of the Cambridge criteria for ductal evaluation and CP staging, but interchangeability between the modalities lacks validation. This work compares ERCP and MRCP Cambridge scores and evaluates diagnostic performance of MRCP in a large cohort of patients with CP.

METHODS

A large radiology database was searched for CP patients who underwent MRCP between 2003 and 2013. Next, patients who also had an ERCP within 90 days of their MRCP were selected. These were categorized into mild, moderate, and severe CP using the standardized Cambridge classification for ERCP. Radiologists blinded to ERCP findings then rated MRCP with modified Cambridge scores.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 325 patients (mean age 51 years; 56% female). By ERCP Cambridge classification, 122 had mild CP, 109 moderate CP, and 94 severe CP. MRCP and ERCP showed total agreement of Cambridge score in only 43% of cases. With ERCP as reference, the sensitivity and specificity of MRCP in detecting Cambridge scores 4 + 5 (main-duct predominant) were 75.9% and 64.3%, and for Cambridge score 3 (side-branch predominant) it was 60.0% and 76.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of strong concordance between ERCP- and MRCP-based grading of CP using the Cambridge criteria. MRCP had moderate to good performance in diagnosing side-branch predominant versus main-duct predominant CP. This suggests an inherent challenge in comparing literature and calls for a revision of the standards.

摘要

目的

慢性胰腺炎(CP)的分级是临床和放射学的挑战。逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)和磁共振胰胆管造影(MRCP)采用了一种剑桥标准对胆管进行评估和 CP 分期,但这两种方式之间的可互换性缺乏验证。本研究比较了 ERCP 和 MRCP 的剑桥评分,并在一组大型 CP 患者中评估了 MRCP 的诊断性能。

方法

从 2003 年至 2013 年的大型放射学数据库中搜索 CP 患者,这些患者接受了 MRCP 检查。然后,选择在 MRCP 后 90 天内也接受了 ERCP 的患者。根据 ERCP 的标准化剑桥分类,将这些患者分为轻度、中度和重度 CP。放射科医生在不知道 ERCP 结果的情况下,使用改良的剑桥评分对 MRCP 进行评分。

结果

该队列包括 325 例患者(平均年龄 51 岁;56%为女性)。根据 ERCP 剑桥分类,122 例为轻度 CP,109 例为中度 CP,94 例为重度 CP。MRCP 和 ERCP 的剑桥评分总一致性仅为 43%。以 ERCP 为参考,MRCP 检测剑桥评分 4+5(主胰管为主)的敏感性和特异性分别为 75.9%和 64.3%,检测剑桥评分 3(侧支胰管为主)的敏感性和特异性分别为 60.0%和 76.9%。

结论

使用剑桥标准,基于 ERCP 和 MRCP 的 CP 分级之间缺乏强烈的一致性。MRCP 在诊断侧支胰管为主和主胰管为主的 CP 方面具有中等至良好的性能。这表明在比较文献时存在固有挑战,并呼吁修订标准。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验