PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9824361

Pancreatic imaging.

P L Baron·C Kay·B Hoffman
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer has traditionally been difficult to diagnose. There are now numerous diagnostic tests that can visualize these tumors early when they are small and determine which cases are the most likely to be unresectable. The principal tests, including spiral CT, MR imaging, endoscopic ultrasound, and laparoscopy, have advantages and disadvantages. The purpose of this article is to review each technique, and try to come up with a recommended approach to evaluating the patient with pancreatic malignancy.

Explore related subjects

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeDiagnostic ImagingEndoscopyHumansLaparoscopyMagnetic Resonance ImagingPancreatic NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonography, InterventionalJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P L Baron, C Kay, B Hoffman. 1999. Pancreatic imaging.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9824361/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Endoscopic stenting in benign pancreatic diseases.

The role of endoscopic therapy in the management of pancreatic diseases is continuously evolving; at present, most pathological conditions of the pancreas are successfully treated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or both. Endoscopic placement of stents has played and still plays a major role in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis, pseudocysts, pancreas divisum, main pancreatic duct injuries, pancreatic fistulae, complications of acute pancreatitis, recurrent idiopathic pancreatitis and in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. These stents are currently routinely placed to reduce intraductal hypertension, bypass obstructing stones, restore lumen patency in cases with dominant, symptomatic strictures, seal main pancreatic duct disruption, drain pseudocysts or fluid collections, treat symptomatic major or minor papilla sphincter stenosis, and prevent procedure-induced acute pancreatitis. The present review aims at updating and discussing techniques, indications and results of endoscopic pancreatic duct stent placement in acute and chronic inflammatory diseases of the pancreas.

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde↗
PubMed2007

Optimizing choledocholithiasis management: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

HYPOTHESIS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is more cost-effective for managing incidental choledocholithiasis (CDL) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and intraoperative cholangiogram (LC/IOC) than laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to compare ERCP with LCBDE. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the key contributors to cost-effectiveness between the 2 treatment options. SETTING: Costs were approached from the institutional perspective considering a typical patient undergoing LC/IOC at a large referral center. PATIENTS: The base case patient evaluated was a woman 18 years of age or older with symptomatic cholelithiasis and incidental CDL discovered at the time of LC/IOC. INTERVENTIONS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with drainage procedure performed after LC/IOC or LCBDE during LC/IOC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, quality-adjusted life years gained, mean cost-effectiveness ratios, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, ERCP was the optimal treatment choice with a cost of $24 300 for 0.9 quality-adjusted life years gained compared with $28 400 and 0.88 quality-adjusted life years for LCBDE. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography remained the optimal strategy for CDL in multiway probabilistic sensitivity analysis. If LCBDE were performed and the cost of a potential operative case lost was $3100 or less and the cost of ERCP hospitalization was $18 000 or more, then LCBDE became the preferred treatment for CDL. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was both less costly and more effective than LCBDE. Factors important to choosing the best strategy for CDL management included the cost of a potential case lost due to LCBDE performance and the cost of ERCP hospitalization.

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde↗