4.3 Article

Diagnostic criteria for pancreaticobiliary maljunction 2013

Journal

JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES
Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 159-161

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.57

Keywords

Common channel; Congenital biliary dilatation; Pancreaticobiliary maljunction

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23591984, 23592635] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pancreaticobiliary maljunction is a congenital malformation in which the pancreatic and bile ducts join anatomically outside the duodenal wall. The diagnostic criteria for pancreaticobiliary maljunction were proposed in 1987. The committee of The Japanese Study Group on Pancreaticobiliary Maljunction (JSGPM) for diagnostic criteria for pancreaticobiliary maljunction began to revise the diagnostic criteria from 2011 taking recently advanced diagnostic imaging techniques into consideration, and the final revised version was approved in the 36(th) Annual Meeting of JSPBM. For diagnosis of pancreaticobiliary maljunction, an abnormally long common channel and/or an abnormal union between the pancreatic and bile ducts must be evident on direct cholangiography, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, percutaneous transpehatic cholangiography, or intraoperative cholangiography; magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography; or three-dimensional drip infusion cholangiography computed tomography. However, in cases with a relatively short common channel, it is necessary to confirm that the effect of the papillary sphincter does not extend to the junction by direct cholangiography. Pancreaticobiliary maljunction can be diagnosed also by endoscopic ultrasonography or multi-planar reconstruction images provided by multi-detector row computed tomography. Elevated amylase levels in bile and extrahepatic bile duct dilatation strongly suggest the existence of pancreaticobiliary maljunction.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available