ArticlePolish journal of radiology2019
The accuracy of 3T magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in suspected choledocholithiasis.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancements in the diagnosis of biliopancreatic diseases: A comparative review and study on future insights.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Advancements in Managing Choledocholithiasis and Acute Cholangitis in the Elderly: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate interobserver agreement during magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography (MRCP) evaluation and the sensitivity and specificity of MRCP obtained with 3T scanners in cases of bile duct obstruction. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 37 patients who had MRCP and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) were included. Choledochal pathology was divided into two groups regarding the presence of stones as "there is stone or not". MRCPs were performed with a 3-Tesla system using respiratory triggered HASTE technique in axial and coronal planes and with T2 SPACE sequence in the coronal plane. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated separately for each observer. The average of both observers was calculated for comparison with other studies.
resultsThirty-seven patients were in the study population. Agreement between the observers was analysed, and Cohen's κ value was evaluated as 0.84. For two observers, the sensitivity of MRCP was 93%, whereas the specificity was 75% for the first observer and 62% for the second.
conclusionsIn this study we found a high level of interobserver agreement in evaluating MRCP. MRCP has a high sensitivity in detecting choledocholithiasis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.