4.7 Article

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiography Does Not Reliably Distinguish IgG4-Associated Cholangitis From Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis or Cholangiocarcinoma

Journal

CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue 9, Pages 800-U120

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.05.019

Keywords

IgG4-Associated Cholangitis; Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography; Immunoglobulin G4; Autoimmune Pancreatitis

Funding

  1. Department of Health's NIHR Biomedical Research Centre

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Distinction of immunoglobulin G4-associated cholangitis (IAC) from primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) or cholangiocarcinoma is challenging. We aimed to assess the performance characteristics of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) for the diagnosis of IAC. METHODS: Seventeen physicians from centers in the United States, Japan, and the United Kingdom, unaware of clinical data, reviewed 40 preselected ERCs of patients with IAC (n = 20), PSC (n = 10), and cholangiocarcinoma (n = 10). The performance characteristics of ERC for IAC diagnosis as well as the kappa statistic for intraobserver and interobserver agreement were calculated. RESULTS: The overall specificity, sensitivity, and interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of IAC were 88%, 45%, and 0.18, respectively. Reviewer origin, specialty, or years of experience had no statistically significant effect on reporting success. The overall intraobserver agreement was fair (0.74). The operating characteristics of different ERC features for the diagnosis of IAC were poor. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high specificity of ERC for diagnosing IAC, sensitivity is poor, suggesting that many patients with IAC may be misdiagnosed with PSC or cholangiocarcinoma. Additional diagnostic strategies are likely to be vital in distinguishing these diseases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available