Table 4

Studies comparing MRCP and ERCP with final diagnosis

Study

Definition of Final diagnosis

Sensitivity

Specificity


MRCP vs. final diagnosis

ERCP vs. final diagnosis*

MRCP vs. final diagnosis

ERCP vs. final diagnosis*


Adamek[9]

ERCP plus histological findings or follow-up

42/47 for any abnormality

0.89 (CI: 0.77–0.95)

22/27 for malignancy

0.81 (CI: 0.63–0.92)

0.91 for any abnormality

0.93 for malignancy

12/13

0.92 (CI: 0.67–0.99) for any abnormality

33/33

1.00 (CI: 0.90–1.00) for malignancy

0.92 for any abnormality

0.94 for malignancy

Laokpessi[21]

Stone extraction with ERCP or IOC

105/113

0.93 (CI: 87–0.96) for Choledocholithiasis

78/81

0.95 (CI: 0.87–0.98)

34/34

1.00 (CI: 0.90–1.00)

19/19

1.00 (CI: 0.79–1.00)

Lee[22]

ERCP plus surgical findings

17/21 for malignancy

0.81 (CI: 0.60–0.92)

15/21

0.71 (CI: 0.50–0.86)

23/25

0.92 (CI: 0.75–0.98)

23/24

0.96 (CI: 0.80 to 0.99)

Regan[26]

ERCP, endoscopic balloon or basket extraction or surgical removal of stones

14/15

0.93 (CI: 0.70–0.99) for choledocholithiasis

15/15

1.00 (CI: 0.80–1.00)

7/8

0.88 (CI: 0.53–0.98)

8/8

1.00 (CI: 0.68–1.00)


*Raw data was not reported in some studies, therefore it is not clear whether are not the two groups (MRCP vs. final diagnosis and ERCP vs. final diagnosis) are directly comparable.

Kaltenthaler et al. BMC Medical Imaging 2006 6:9   doi:10.1186/1471-2342-6-9

Open Data