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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with papillary biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic biopsy in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis.
    Author: Jung JG, Lee JK, Lee KH, Lee KT, Woo YS, Paik WH, Park DH, Lee SS, Seo DW, Lee SK, Kim MH.
    Journal: Pancreatology; 2015; 15(3):259-64. PubMed ID: 25891790.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: International consensus diagnostic criteria (ICDC) have been proposed for the diagnostic criteria and algorithm of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP). Although endoscopy is important in the diagnosis of AIP, practical patterns of its usage vary considerably worldwide. This study aimed to compare endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with papillary biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic biopsy for diagnosing AIP using ICDC. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed and classified 165 Korean patients diagnosed by Korean criteria from June 2007 to October 2013. Among them, 61 patients underwent ERCP with duodenal papillary biopsy (group A) and 62 patients underwent EUS-guided pancreatic biopsy (group B). We analyzed the diagnostic criteria and levels of each criterion, and type of AIP before and after endoscopic procedures. RESULTS: ERCP with papillary biopsy increased the diagnostic sensitivity from 65.6% (40/61) to 95.1% (58/61) (P < 0.01). EUS-guided pancreatic biopsy increased the diagnostic sensitivity from 50.0% (27/62) to 88.7% (55/62) (P < 0.01). The increases of diagnostic sensitivity in two endoscopic methods were not different statistically. In diagnosing definite AIP, EUS-guided pancreatic biopsy was more useful than ERCP with papilla biopsy (sensitivity; 79.0% vs. 65.6%, P < 0.01). EUS-guided pancreatic biopsy was helpful to classify type 1 and type 2 AIP in some patients. Procedure-related complication (mild pancreatitis) developed in one patient (1.6%) in group A and two patients (3.2%) in group B. ERCP with papillary biopsy was less expensive than EUS-guided pancreatic biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Both ERCP with papillary biopsy and EUS-guided pancreatic biopsy are safe and play important roles in diagnosing AIP according to the ICDC.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]