Assessment of Ultrasound Effectiveness for the Diagnostics of Common Bile Duct Diseases Complicated by Obstructive Jaundice
Author`s Contribution:
- Kharkiv National Medical University, Ukraine
- State Institution “Zaycev V. T. Institute of General and Urgent Surgery of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine”, Ukraine
Background and aim of study:
Ultrasound is the first-priority screening test in the
diagnostics of common bile duct diseases that enables
the differentiation of jaundice genesis and
determination of indications and contraindications for
further non-invasive and invasive tests.
The aim of research is to determine the effectiveness of
ultrasound for the diagnostics of common bile duct
diseases complicated by obstructive jaundice (OJ)
Research methods:
For the period from 2011 to 2017, 118 patients with
benign and malignant common bile duct diseases
complicated by obstructive jaundice received in-patient
treatment at the facilities of the Department of Surgery
No. 1 of Kharkiv National Medical University at the
clinic of State Institution “Zaycev V. T. Institute of
General and Urgent Surgery of the National Academy
of Medical Sciences of Ukraine”.
Results:
The sensitivity of ultrasound as OJ indicator was
74.3%. During ultrasound, various signs of common
bile duct diseases were found that were combined in
several cases: high obstruction of bile ducts in 50
(67.6%) patients; low obstruction in 24 (32.4%);
dilated common bile duct in 60 (81.1%), dilated
intrahepatic segmental and lobar hepatic ducts in 68
(91.9%); dilated common bile duct walls in 28
(37.8%), acoustic shadows in the common bile duct in
32 (43.2%), organic hepatic changes in 38 (51.3%)
patients. No signs of bile duct damage were found in
10 (13.5%) cases. In 74.3% (55 patients), ultrasound
was sufficient for establishing the correct clinical
diagnosis. It was mostly the case for obstructive
jaundice of benign etiology (33.7% of correct
diagnoses), for obstructive jaundice of malignant
etiology in 39.1% of cases, taking into account that
there were three times as many patients with malignant
tumors as with benign ones. Calculi in the common
bile duct were found in 17 cases (23% patient), in the
gall bladder in 16.2% (12 cases). Common bile duct
strictures were found using ultrasound in 4 (5.4%)
patients. Biliodigestive anastomoses strictures were
found in 3 (4.05%) patients. 10 (13.5%) false negative
and 6 (8.1%) false positive results were found in
patients with obstructive jaundice. In obstructive
jaundice with cicatricial-inflammatory common bile
duct strictures, there were 2 (2.7%) false negative and 3
(4.05%) false positive results. The low level of stricture
diagnoses was due to the impossibility of common bile
duct examination all along its way (more than 4 cm).
Ultrasound precision for the identification of common
bile duct tumors was 79.7%. It points to the insufficient
informative power of this method for the identification
of obstructive cholestasis of tumor nature. 30 (40.5%)
patients with cholangiocarcinomas were identified
following ultrasound. Ultrasound was non-informative
in 15 (20.25%) cases of cholangiocarcinoma
identification. In patients with cholangiocarcinomas of
different localization, there were 4 (5.4%) false
positive and 15 (20.3%) false negative results. The
diagnostic value of ultrasound for the identification of
cholangiocarcinomas is unsatisfactory.
Conclusion:
Following the analysis of ultrasound use in the
diagnostics of obstructive jaundice complicating
common bile duct diseases, it can be stated that
ultrasound is an obligatory non-invasive, generally
available and cheap examination technique at the stage
of differential diagnostics of biliary hypertension.
However, ultrasound cannot be used in isolation as the
only diagnostic technique (strength of recommendation
3В). Ultrasound is a technique of choice in the
diagnostics of obstructive jaundice with benign
etiology. It also helps establish or exclude the
obstructive genesis of jaundice – absence of bile duct
dilation at any level regardless of hepatic function
DOI and UDC:
DOI: 10.26697/ijes.2019.4.44; UDC: 616.36/.367-06-07:616.36-008.5
Information about the authors:
Boyko Valeriy Vladimirovich – Doctor of Medical
Sciences, Professor, Head of the Surgery Department
No. 1, Kharkiv National Medical University; Director,
Zaycev Institute of General and Urgent Surgery of the
National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine,
Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Avdosyev Yuriy Vladimirovich – Doctor of Medical
Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of
Intervention Radiology, Zaycev Institute of General
and Urgent Surgery of the National Academy of
Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Sochnieva Anastasiia Lvovna – Postgraduate Student,
Kharkiv National Medical University, Ukraine.
Yevtushenko Denys Oleksandrovych – Doctor of
Medical Sciences, Professor of the Department of
Surgery No. 1, Kharkiv National Medical University,
Ukraine.