Oral cholecystography compared to cholescintigraphy for evaluation of cystic duct patency prior to ESWL treatment

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

In a prospective, blinded study of 109 patients with cholecystolithiasis, oral cholecystography and 99Tcm-EHIDA cholescintigraphy were compared in terms of reliability for demonstrating cystic duct patency: one of the prerequisites for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) treatment of cholecystolithiasis. Patients with a positive result on one or both tests were regarded as having cystic duct patency. Patients with negative and uncertain result of both tests or one of each were regarded as having no cystic duct patency. Concordance between the two tests was obtained in 93 of 109 patients. The diagnostic reliability of cholescintigraphy and oral cholecystography were 95 and 86%, respectively (P < 0.05), suggesting a more precise determination of gallbladder filling with scintigraphy.

Original languageEnglish
JournalNuclear Medicine Communications
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)47-9
Number of pages3
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1994

    Research areas

  • Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cholecystography, Cholelithiasis, Cystic Duct, Female, Gallbladder, Humans, Lithotripsy, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Comparative Study, Journal Article

ID: 165884646