Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30859236›Full record

ReviewDer Radiologe2019

[Passive and active magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography : Technique, indications, and typical anatomy].

J Vosshenrich, D T Boll, C J Zech

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Radiologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

J VosshenrichKlinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsspital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031, Basel, Schweiz. jan.vosshenrich@usb.ch.
D T BollKlinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsspital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031, Basel, Schweiz.
C J ZechKlinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsspital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031, Basel, Schweiz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical/methodical issueIn daily routine, every radiologist is confronted with a variety of questions concerning the biliary tract and pancreatic system. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL

methodsToday, besides sonography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is considered the method of choice in the investigation of many disorders of the hepatobiliary and pancreatic system and is commonly preferred over invasive ERCP in a mere diagnostic setting. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: Since its introduction in 1991, MRCP has constantly evolved. Major innovations have been the reduction of acquisition time by using fast spin echo (FSE) sequences, the use of respiratory gating and contrast-enhanced imaging of the bile ducts with hepatobiliary-specific MRI contrast agents. PERFORMANCE: Many diagnoses may already be made with noncontrast enhanced images. By supplemental administration of a hepatobiliary-specific contrast agent, it is also possible to evaluate the flow dynamics of the bile. This is of additional value especially in patients who underwent surgery of the biliodigestive system or endoscopic interventions. ACHIEVEMENTS: Aside from robustness and reproducibility, a major advantage of this technique is the modular design of imaging protocols, which can easily be adapted to the clinical question. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: MRCP is a reliable and low-risk imaging method for primary diagnosis and follow-up of biliary and pancreatic pathologies.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeCholangiopancreatography, Magnetic ResonanceBile DuctsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPancreasReproducibility of ResultsAnatomic variantsBile ductBiliary tractsContrast-enhanced magnetic cholangiographyHepatobiliary-specific contrast agent

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.