Tobin R S, Vogelzang R L, Gore R M, Keigley B
J Comput Tomogr. 1987 Jul;11(3):261-6. doi: 10.1016/0149-936x(87)90092-0.
Fifty-seven patients with suspected pancreaticobiliary pathology constituting a clinical subset in whom the diagnosis was problematic or nonspecific were evaluated with computed tomography and ERCP. The relative sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of the two tests were compared. Computed tomography was successful in obtaining a diagnostic examination in 100% and ERCP was technically successful in 75%. Both tests were equally accurate in detecting an abnormality (computed tomography 95.7%; ERCP 95.3%) and offering a correct diagnosis (computed tomography 72%; ERCP 70%). Sensitivity and specificity of the two tests for detection of an abnormality was computed tomography 100% and 91.3%; ERCP 91.7% and 100%. Sensitivity and specificity for the correct diagnosis was computed tomography 59% and 91.3%; ERCP 46% and 100%. Computed tomography was also superior to ERCP in making a correct diagnosis in pancreatic carcinoma (80% versus 63%) and pancreatitis (75% versus 50%). Based on these results we conclude that computed tomography utilizing high doses of intravenous contrast material and thin collimation is the preferred screening examination for pancreaticobiliary disease. ERCP should be reserved for those cases where the pancreaticobiliary disease. ERCP should be reserved for those cases where the diagnosis on computed tomography is obscure or uncertain and/or the pancreatic or biliary ductal anatomy requires direct contrast imaging.
57例疑似胰胆疾病的患者构成了一个临床亚组,这些患者的诊断存在问题或不具有特异性,对其进行了计算机断层扫描(CT)和内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)检查。比较了这两种检查的相对敏感性、特异性和准确性。CT检查成功完成诊断性检查的比例为100%,ERCP技术成功率为75%。在检测异常方面(CT为95.7%;ERCP为95.3%)以及做出正确诊断方面(CT为72%;ERCP为70%),两种检查的准确性相当。两种检查检测异常的敏感性和特异性分别为:CT为100%和91.3%;ERCP为91.7%和100%。做出正确诊断的敏感性和特异性分别为:CT为59%和91.3%;ERCP为46%和100%。在胰腺癌(80%对63%)和胰腺炎(75%对50%)的正确诊断方面,CT也优于ERCP。基于这些结果,我们得出结论,使用高剂量静脉造影剂和薄层准直的CT是胰胆疾病首选的筛查检查。ERCP应保留用于CT诊断不明确或不确定且/或胰胆管解剖结构需要直接对比成像的病例。