No abstract available.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic*

No abstract available.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic*

No abstract available.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular*

No abstract available.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Neuroendocrine Tumors*

BACKGROUND: Extrahepatic bile duct stones can be classified into two types. Primary stones are formed de nevo in the bile duct, whereas secondary stones migrate from the gallbladder into the bililary tree. The differentiation between primary and secondary stones is very difficult before operation. The aim of this study is to determine the origin of extrahepatic bile duct stones by analyzing MRC features. METHODS: MRC was obtained in 38 patients with stones in both the common duct and gallbladder. MRC findings were compared for gross characteristics and MR signal patterns between common duct stone and gallbladder stone pairs. The gross morphologic characteristics of gallstones on MRC were classified into oval, polygonal, round, rod, sandy and mixed shape. Gallstone patterns seen on heavily T2-weighted images were categorized into one of two patterns: dark, and mixed signal. RESULTS: According to the morphologic characteristics on MRC images, the common duct stones were oval (n=9), polygonal (n=15), round (n=6), sandy (n=4), mixed (n=3) and rod (n=1). The visualized MR signal patterns of common duct stones on heavily T2-weighted images were dark (n=28) and heterogenous (n=10). CONCLUSION: On MRC, the gross morphologic characteristics and gallstone patterns of common duct stones were similar to those of their paired gallbladder stones in 60.5 to 78.9% of patients.
Bile Ducts ; Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Cholangiography* ; Gallbladder ; Gallstones ; Humans

BACKGROUND: Extrahepatic bile duct stones can be classified into two types. Primary stones are formed de nevo in the bile duct, whereas secondary stones migrate from the gallbladder into the bililary tree. The differentiation between primary and secondary stones is very difficult before operation. The aim of this study is to determine the origin of extrahepatic bile duct stones by analyzing MRC features. METHODS: MRC was obtained in 38 patients with stones in both the common duct and gallbladder. MRC findings were compared for gross characteristics and MR signal patterns between common duct stone and gallbladder stone pairs. The gross morphologic characteristics of gallstones on MRC were classified into oval, polygonal, round, rod, sandy and mixed shape. Gallstone patterns seen on heavily T2-weighted images were categorized into one of two patterns: dark, and mixed signal. RESULTS: According to the morphologic characteristics on MRC images, the common duct stones were oval (n=9), polygonal (n=15), round (n=6), sandy (n=4), mixed (n=3) and rod (n=1). The visualized MR signal patterns of common duct stones on heavily T2-weighted images were dark (n=28) and heterogenous (n=10). CONCLUSION: On MRC, the gross morphologic characteristics and gallstone patterns of common duct stones were similar to those of their paired gallbladder stones in 60.5 to 78.9% of patients.
Bile Ducts ; Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Cholangiography* ; Gallbladder ; Gallstones ; Humans

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of ancillary CT findings other than the obstructive lesion per se for the differential diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary obstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS:CT findings of 49 patients with extrahepatic bile duct obstruction(22 benign and 27 malignant lesions) were assessed with emphasis on the patterns of ductal dilatation, contrast enhancement, and diffuse thickening of the extrahepatic ductal wall. Degree of central and peripheral intrahepratic ductal dilatation was graded by comparing with the adjacent portal radicles and hepatic parenchymal thickeness. RESULTS: Diffuse circumferential thickening and contrast enhancement of the extrahepatic ductal wall were more frequent in benign cases, but only thickening was statistically significant(p < 0.01). Peripheral intrahepatic ducts were more severely dilated by malignant causes(p < 0.01). With the same degrees of extrahepatic and central ductal dilatations, peripheral intrahepatic ducts were more severely dilated in malignant than in benign cases. CONCLUSION: These results may help to interpret the CT findings of extrahepatic biliary obstruction, particularly when the cause of biliary obstruction is uncertain.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic ; Diagnosis, Differential ; Dilatation* ; Humans

The pattern of thickening of the extrahepatic bile duct on computed tomography was analysed in 30 cases with recurrent pyogenic cholangitis diagnosed by surgery (n=19) or clinical basis (n=11). The mean wall thickness of the extrahepatic bile duct was 3.3mm (range, 1-6.3mm). Diffuse thickening of the extrahepatic bile ductal wall was demonstrated in 26 of 30 cases. Diffuse thickening of the extrahepatic bile duct in recurrent pyogenic cholangitis may be differentiated from focal thickening of duct in a common duct cancer or pancreatic cancer.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Cholangitis* ; Pancreatic Neoplasms

The pattern of thickening of the extrahepatic bile duct on computed tomography was analysed in 30 cases with recurrent pyogenic cholangitis diagnosed by surgery (n=19) or clinical basis (n=11). The mean wall thickness of the extrahepatic bile duct was 3.3mm (range, 1-6.3mm). Diffuse thickening of the extrahepatic bile ductal wall was demonstrated in 26 of 30 cases. Diffuse thickening of the extrahepatic bile duct in recurrent pyogenic cholangitis may be differentiated from focal thickening of duct in a common duct cancer or pancreatic cancer.
Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic* ; Cholangitis* ; Pancreatic Neoplasms

Intraductal papillary neoplasms of the bile duct (IPNBs) are known to show various pathologic features and biological behaviors. Recently, two categories of IPNBs have been proposed based on their histologic similarities to pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs): type 1 IPNBs, which share many features with IPMNs; and type 2 IPNBs, which are variably different from IPMNs. The four IPNB subtypes were re-evaluated with respect to these two categories. Intestinal IPNBs showing a predominantly villous growth may correspond to type 1, while those showing papillay-tubular or papillay-villous growth correspond to type 2. Regarding gastric IPNB, those with regular foveolar structures with varying numbers of pyloric glands may correspond to type 1, while those with papillary-foveolar structures with gastric immunophenotypes and complicated structures may correspond to type 2. Pancreatobiliary IPNBs that show fine ramifying branching may be categorized as type 1, while others containing many complicated structures may be categorized as type 2. Oncocytic type, which displays solid growth or irregular papillary structures, may correspond to type 2, while papillary configurations with pseudostratified oncocytic lining cells correspond to type 1. Generally, type 1 IPNBs of any subtype develop in the intrahepatic bile ducts, while type 2 IPNBs develop in the extrahepatic bile duct. These findings suggest that IPNBs arising in the intrahepatic ducts are biliary counterparts of IPMNs, while those arising in the extrahepatic ducts display differences from prototypical IPMNs. The recognition of these two categories of IPNBs with reference to IPMNs and their anatomical location along the biliary tree may deepen our understanding of IPNBs.
Bile Ducts ; Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic ; Bile Ducts, Intrahepatic ; Bile ; Biliary Tract ; Cholangiocarcinoma ; Gastric Mucosa ; Mucins