1991Investigative RadiologyRequires access

Comparison of Ultrasonography and Oral Cholecystography in Biliary Lithotripsy

William E. Torres, Bruce R. Baumgartner, Marklyn Jones, HARVEY V. STEINBERG, Jack E. Peterson

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Ultrasound and oral cholecystography (OCG) are both used to evaluate candidates for biliary lithotripsy. Some investigators have suggested abandoning the OCG, believing that sufficient screening information can be obtained from ultrasound. This study compares ultrasound and OCG in assessing the size and number of gallstones, both in vitro and in vivo. In the in vitro model, 35 gallstones, divided into 20 groups, were separately suspended in dilute contrast media in a phantom, and examined by ultrasound and simulated OCG by each of three gastrointestinal radiologists. In the in vivo study, the ultrasound and OCG examinations from 53 patients were independently reviewed by three radiologists. The number and size of the stones were recorded in both studies. In the in vitro study, the stone size was measured within 2 mm of the actual size by OCG in 23/35 stones (66%) and by ultrasound in 4/35 stones (11%). The correct number of stones was determined by OCG in 19/20 groups (95%), and by ultrasound in 14/20 (70%). In the in vivo study, all readers saw the same number of stones in 40/50 (80%) patients by OCG and 33/49 (67%) patients by ultrasound. Statistical analyses revealed correlation coefficients for OCG greater than those for ultrasound in each comparison. The size of the largest stone was within 2 mm by all readers in 26/51 (51%) of patients by OCG and 20/47 (43%) patients by ultrasound. Oral cholecystography is more reliable than ultrasound for the determination of size and number of stones in patients being screened for biliary lithotripsy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Ultrasound and oral cholecystography (OCG) are both used to evaluate candidates for biliary lithotripsy. Some investigators have suggested abandoning the OCG, believing that sufficient screening information can be obtained from ultrasound. This study compares ultrasound and OCG in assessing the size and number of gallstones, both in vitro and in vivo. In the in vitro model, 35 gallstones, divided into 20 groups, were separately suspended in dilute contrast media in a phantom, and examined by ultrasound and simulated OCG by each of three gastrointestinal radiologists. In the in vivo study, the ultrasound and OCG examinations from 53 patients were independently reviewed by three radiologists. The number and size of the stones were recorded in both studies. In the in vitro study, the stone size was measured within 2 mm of the actual size by OCG in 23/35 stones (66%) and by ultrasound in 4/35 stones (11%). The correct number of stones was determined by OCG in 19/20 groups (95%), and by ultrasound in 14/20 (70%). In the in vivo study, all readers saw the same number of stones in 40/50 (80%) patients by OCG and 33/49 (67%) patients by ultrasound. Statistical analyses revealed correlation coefficients for OCG greater than those for ultrasound in each comparison. The size of the largest stone was within 2 mm by all readers in 26/51 (51%) of patients by OCG and 20/47 (43%) patients by ultrasound. Oral cholecystography is more reliable than ultrasound for the determination of size and number of stones in patients being screened for biliary lithotripsy.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Ultrasound and oral cholecystography (OCG) are both used to evaluate candidates for biliary lithotripsy. Some investigators have suggested abandoning the OCG, believing that sufficient screening information can be obtained from ultrasound. This study compares ultrasound and OCG in assessing the size and number of gallstones, both in vitro and in vivo. In the in vitro model, 35 gallstones, divided into 20 groups, were separately suspended in dilute contrast media in a phantom, and examined by ultrasound and simulated OCG by each of three gastrointestinal radiologists. In the in vivo study, the ultrasound and OCG examinations from 53 patients were independently reviewed by three radiologists. The number and size of the stones were recorded in both studies. In the in vitro study, the stone size was measured within 2 mm of the actual size by OCG in 23/35 stones (66%) and by ultrasound in 4/35 stones (11%). The correct number of stones was determined by OCG in 19/20 groups (95%), and by ultrasound in 14/20 (70%). In the in vivo study, all readers saw the same number of stones in 40/50 (80%) patients by OCG and 33/49 (67%) patients by ultrasound. Statistical analyses revealed correlation coefficients for OCG greater than those for ultrasound in each comparison. The size of the largest stone was within 2 mm by all readers in 26/51 (51%) of patients by OCG and 20/47 (43%) patients by ultrasound. Oral cholecystography is more reliable than ultrasound for the determination of size and number of stones in patients being screened for biliary lithotripsy.

Key concepts: Cholecystography, Ultrasound, Gallstones, Medicine, Lithotripsy, Gallbladder, Ultrasonography, Radiology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of Ultrasonography and Oral Cholecystography in Biliary Lithotripsy — Research Paper | ScholarLens