Trend in predictive factors of choledocholithiasis: the key to the management of pediatric patients with suspected gallstones.

M A Capparelli, S Canestrari, R Ortiz, P D D'Alessandro, V H Ayarzabal, M E Barrenechea
{"title":"Trend in predictive factors of choledocholithiasis: the key to the management of pediatric patients with suspected gallstones.","authors":"M A Capparelli, S Canestrari, R Ortiz, P D D'Alessandro, V H Ayarzabal, M E Barrenechea","doi":"10.54847/cp.2024.03.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To reduce the overuse of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and the rates of non-therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in pediatric patients suspected of choledocholithiasis.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Retrospective study of patients suspected of choledocholithiasis between January 2010 and June 2023. Patients with cholangitis or two or more of the following predictive factors of choledocholithiasis in initial laboratory tests and ultrasound were categorized as high-risk group: total bilirubin level ≥ 2 mg/dl, common bile duct > 6 millimeters on ultrasound; and detection of choledocholithiasis by ultrasound. Patients were recategorized according to the results of the second set of laboratory and ultrasound analysis. Confirmatory modalities (magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and/or intraoperative cholangiography) were used to evaluate the presence of choledocholithiasis. Finally, we assessed the predictive capability of both the initial high-risk group and the group after recategorization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 129 patients were included. After initial studies, 72 (55.8%) patients were classified into the high-risk group. After recategorization, only 29 (22.5%) patients were included in this group. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy of the initial high-risk group were 89.3%, 53.5%, 34.7%, 94.7%, and 61.2%, respectively, while after recategorization, they were 82.1%, 94.1%, 79.3%, 95.0%, and 91.5%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Recategorization of the risk of choledocholithiasis would significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy of choledocholithiasis and help reduce the overuse of more complex and unnecessary studies/procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":94306,"journal":{"name":"Cirugia pediatrica : organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Cirugia Pediatrica","volume":"37 3","pages":"110-115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cirugia pediatrica : organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Cirugia Pediatrica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54847/cp.2024.03.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To reduce the overuse of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and the rates of non-therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in pediatric patients suspected of choledocholithiasis.

Materials and methods: Retrospective study of patients suspected of choledocholithiasis between January 2010 and June 2023. Patients with cholangitis or two or more of the following predictive factors of choledocholithiasis in initial laboratory tests and ultrasound were categorized as high-risk group: total bilirubin level ≥ 2 mg/dl, common bile duct > 6 millimeters on ultrasound; and detection of choledocholithiasis by ultrasound. Patients were recategorized according to the results of the second set of laboratory and ultrasound analysis. Confirmatory modalities (magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and/or intraoperative cholangiography) were used to evaluate the presence of choledocholithiasis. Finally, we assessed the predictive capability of both the initial high-risk group and the group after recategorization.

Results: A total of 129 patients were included. After initial studies, 72 (55.8%) patients were classified into the high-risk group. After recategorization, only 29 (22.5%) patients were included in this group. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy of the initial high-risk group were 89.3%, 53.5%, 34.7%, 94.7%, and 61.2%, respectively, while after recategorization, they were 82.1%, 94.1%, 79.3%, 95.0%, and 91.5%, respectively.

Conclusions: Recategorization of the risk of choledocholithiasis would significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy of choledocholithiasis and help reduce the overuse of more complex and unnecessary studies/procedures.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
胆石症预测因素的趋势:处理疑似胆结石儿科患者的关键。
目的减少儿童胆总管结石疑似患者过度使用磁共振胰胆管造影术和非治疗性内镜逆行胰胆管造影术的比例:2010年1月至2023年6月期间疑似胆总管结石患者的回顾性研究。将患有胆管炎或在最初的实验室检查和超声波检查中具有以下两种或两种以上胆总管结石预测因素的患者归为高风险组:总胆红素水平≥ 2 mg/dl,超声波检查总胆管> 6 mm,超声波检查发现胆总管结石。根据第二套实验室和超声波分析结果对患者进行重新分类。确诊方式(磁共振胰胆管造影、内镜逆行胰胆管造影和/或术中胆管造影)用于评估是否存在胆总管结石。最后,我们评估了初始高风险组和重新分类后的高风险组的预测能力:共纳入了 129 名患者。经过初步研究,72 例(55.8%)患者被归入高风险组。重新分类后,只有 29 名(22.5%)患者被归入该组。初始高风险组的灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和诊断准确率分别为 89.3%、53.5%、34.7%、94.7% 和 61.2%,而重新分类后分别为 82.1%、94.1%、79.3%、95.0% 和 91.5%:结论:对胆总管结石风险进行重新分类将大大提高胆总管结石诊断的准确性,并有助于减少过度使用更复杂和不必要的检查/手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of quality of life and satisfaction in patients undergoing laparoscopic Mitrofanoff procedure. How far do we want to go? Innovation and challenges: minimally invasive surgery training in Latin America. Necrotizing enterocolitis and congenital heart disease: differences in management and prognosis. Optimizing pediatric laparoscopic cholecystectomy: trocar reduction with percutaneous gallblader traction.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1