These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
418 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11490382)
1. Potential impact of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography workload and complication rate in patients referred because of abdominal pain. Farrell RJ; Noonan N; Mahmud N; Morrin MM; Kelleher D; Keeling PW Endoscopy; 2001 Aug; 33(8):668-75. PubMed ID: 11490382 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The potential impact of high-quality MRI of the biliary tree on ERCP workload. Tanner AR; Dwarakanath AD; Tait NP Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2000 Jul; 12(7):773-6. PubMed ID: 10929905 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Diagnostic value of MRCP and indications for ERCP. Sakai Y; Tsuyuguchi T; Tsuchiya S; Sugiyama H; Miyakawa K; Ebara M; Saisho H; Yokosuka O Hepatogastroenterology; 2007 Dec; 54(80):2212-5. PubMed ID: 18265635 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Use of Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in Clinical Practice: Not as Good as We Once Thought. Aydelotte JD; Ali J; Huynh PT; Coopwood TB; Uecker JM; Brown CV J Am Coll Surg; 2015 Jul; 221(1):215-9. PubMed ID: 26047762 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Can endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography replace ERCP in patients with suspected biliary disease? A prospective trial and cost analysis. Scheiman JM; Carlos RC; Barnett JL; Elta GH; Nostrant TT; Chey WD; Francis IR; Nandi PS Am J Gastroenterol; 2001 Oct; 96(10):2900-4. PubMed ID: 11693324 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. Griffin N; Wastle ML; Dunn WK; Ryder SD; Beckingham IJ Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2003 Jul; 15(7):809-13. PubMed ID: 12811312 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prospective assessment of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for noninvasive imaging of the biliary tree. Taylor AC; Little AF; Hennessy OF; Banting SW; Smith PJ; Desmond PV Gastrointest Endosc; 2002 Jan; 55(1):17-22. PubMed ID: 11756908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical significance of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) compared to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Hintze RE; Adler A; Veltzke W; Abou-Rebyeh H; Hammerstingl R; Vogl T; Felix R Endoscopy; 1997 Mar; 29(3):182-7. PubMed ID: 9201467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a large single centre's experience. Farrell RJ; Mahmud N; Noonan N; Kelleher D; Keeling PW Ir J Med Sci; 2001; 170(3):176-80. PubMed ID: 12120969 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Is magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography the new gold standard in biliary imaging? Shanmugam V; Beattie GC; Yule SR; Reid W; Loudon MA Br J Radiol; 2005 Oct; 78(934):888-93. PubMed ID: 16177010 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The selective use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the imaging of the axial biliary tree in patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis. Mofidi R; Lee AC; Madhavan KK; Garden OJ; Parks RW Pancreatology; 2008; 8(1):55-60. PubMed ID: 18253063 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, intraductal ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in bile duct strictures: a prospective comparison of imaging diagnostics with histopathological correlation. Domagk D; Wessling J; Reimer P; Hertel L; Poremba C; Senninger N; Heinecke A; Domschke W; Menzel J Am J Gastroenterol; 2004 Sep; 99(9):1684-9. PubMed ID: 15330902 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Role of Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in the Diagnosis of Choledocholithiasis: Do Benefits Outweigh the Costs? Ward WH; Fluke LM; Hoagland BD; Zarow GJ; Held JM; Ricca RL Am Surg; 2015 Jul; 81(7):720-5. PubMed ID: 26140894 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The decision-making value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients seen in a referral center for suspected biliary and pancreatic disease. Sahai AV; Devonshire D; Yeoh KG; Kay C; Feldman D; Willner I; Farber J; Patel R; Tamasky PR; Cunningham JT; Trus T; Hawes RH; Cotton PB Am J Gastroenterol; 2001 Jul; 96(7):2074-80. PubMed ID: 11467634 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluating the accuracy of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis with choledocholithiasis. Tintara S; Shah I; Yakah W; Ahmed A; Sorrento CS; Kandasamy C; Freedman SD; Kothari DJ; Sheth SG World J Gastroenterol; 2022 Apr; 28(16):1692-1704. PubMed ID: 35581962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A systematic review and economic evaluation of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography compared with diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Kaltenthaler E; Vergel YB; Chilcott J; Thomas S; Blakeborough T; Walters SJ; Bouchier H Health Technol Assess; 2004 Mar; 8(10):iii, 1-89. PubMed ID: 14982656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [The decision-making value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients suspicious for pancreatobiliary diseases]. Chang YJ; Kim JS; Kim HS; Kim MG; Lee JY; Seo YS; Kim CH; Kim JY; Yeon JE; Park JJ; Byun KS; Bak YT; Lee CH Korean J Gastroenterol; 2006 Apr; 47(4):306-11. PubMed ID: 16632983 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with MR cholangiopancreatography in patients with pancreatitis. Sica GT; Braver J; Cooney MJ; Miller FH; Chai JL; Adams DF Radiology; 1999 Mar; 210(3):605-10. PubMed ID: 10207456 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]