IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v8y1988i2p102-109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnosis of Cholestasis

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Safran
  • Robert A. Greenes
  • Turner E. Bynum
  • Mary L. Kierstead

Abstract

The authors analyzed two invasive procedures used to visualize the biliary tree, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiog raphy (PTC), and also explored the utility of preinvasive workups for patients with suspected cholestasis. For this analysis they used published ranges for success, fatality, complications, diagnostic accuracies of the procedures, and prognostic information about the underlying diseases. The choice between ERCP and PTC was found to be a "close call," but ERCP was generally favored as the first-choice procedure. The results suggest that noninvasive imaging does not help decide between ERCP and PTC. Although noninvasive imaging may identify those patients with common duct dilation, the higher success rate with PTC in these patients is offset by a slightly higher mortality rate. Consequently, the choice between ERCP and PTC remains close even if ultrasound has shown that biliary ducts are dilated. Fur thermore, it is shown that these noninvasive tests are most useful when they can conclusively determine the presence or absence of biliary obstruction. For many patients, noninvasive imaging will not obviate the need for invasive tests. Key words: cholestasis; jaundice; decision analysis; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; percutaneous transhepatic cho langiography; abdominal ultrasonography. (Med Decis Making 8:102-109, 1988)

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Safran & Robert A. Greenes & Turner E. Bynum & Mary L. Kierstead, 1988. "Diagnosis of Cholestasis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 8(2), pages 102-109, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:8:y:1988:i:2:p:102-109
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8800800206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X8800800206
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X8800800206?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:8:y:1988:i:2:p:102-109. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.