Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in cholestatic diseases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the usefulness of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in cholestasis. METHODOLOGY: Sixty-seven patients with cholestasis underwent ultrasound and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, subsequently. The results of ultrasound and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography were interpreted by two independent radiologists. RESULTS: According to ultrasonographic findings intra- and extrahepatic cholestasis were diagnosed in 62.7% and 37.3% of patients, respectively. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography revealed intra- and extrahepatic cholestasis in 52.2% and 47.8% of patients at the same group, respectively (p=0.016, kappa=0.789). Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was indicated in 37.3% of patients (22.4% diagnostic, 14.9% therapeutic) according to ultrasonographic findings. However, 41.8% of patients had indication for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography following magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the same group. In 20% of patients who needed diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography according to ultrasonographic findings, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography wasn't indicated after magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Similarly, 8.9% of patients who didn't have indication for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography according to ultrasonographic findings underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (p=0.508, kappa=0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is valuable in diagnosis of extrahepatic cholestasis in patients suspected with intrahepatic cholestasis according to ultrasonographic findings. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography does not prevent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography requirement significantly in patients who need diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography following ultrasonography.