Is Cambridge scoring in chronic pancreatitis the same using ERCP and MRCP?: A need for revision of standards

dc.contributor.authorSwensson, Jordan
dc.contributor.authorAkisik, Fatih
dc.contributor.authorCollins, David
dc.contributor.authorOlesen, Søren Schou
dc.contributor.authorDrewes, Asbjørn Mohr
dc.contributor.authorFrøkjær, Jens Brøndum
dc.contributor.departmentRadiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-21T18:49:42Z
dc.date.available2022-02-21T18:49:42Z
dc.date.issued2021-02
dc.description.abstractPurpose Grading of chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a clinical and radiologic challenge. Retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) use a version of the Cambridge criteria for ductal evaluation and CP staging, but interchangeability between the modalities lacks validation. This work compares ERCP and MRCP Cambridge scores and evaluates diagnostic performance of MRCP in a large cohort of patients with CP. Methods A large radiology database was searched for CP patients who underwent MRCP between 2003 and 2013. Next, patients who also had an ERCP within 90 days of their MRCP were selected. These were categorized into mild, moderate, and severe CP using the standardized Cambridge classification for ERCP. Radiologists blinded to ERCP findings then rated MRCP with modified Cambridge scores. Results The cohort comprised 325 patients (mean age 51 years; 56% female). By ERCP Cambridge classification, 122 had mild CP, 109 moderate CP, and 94 severe CP. MRCP and ERCP showed total agreement of Cambridge score in only 43% of cases. With ERCP as reference, the sensitivity and specificity of MRCP in detecting Cambridge scores 4 + 5 (main-duct predominant) were 75.9% and 64.3%, and for Cambridge score 3 (side-branch predominant) it was 60.0% and 76.9%, respectively. Conclusions There is a lack of strong concordance between ERCP- and MRCP-based grading of CP using the Cambridge criteria. MRCP had moderate to good performance in diagnosing side-branch predominant versus main-duct predominant CP. This suggests an inherent challenge in comparing literature and calls for a revision of the standards.en_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.citationSwensson, J., Akisik, F., Collins, D., Olesen, S. S., Drewes, A. M., & Frøkjær, J. B. (2021). Is Cambridge scoring in chronic pancreatitis the same using ERCP and MRCP?: A need for revision of standards. Abdominal Radiology, 46(2), 647–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02685-2en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/27888
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s00261-020-02685-2en_US
dc.relation.journalAbdominal Radiologyen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourceAuthoren_US
dc.subjectchronic pancreatitisen_US
dc.subjectmagnetic resonance cholangiopancreatographyen_US
dc.subjectERCPen_US
dc.titleIs Cambridge scoring in chronic pancreatitis the same using ERCP and MRCP?: A need for revision of standardsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Swensson_2021_Cambridge.pdf
Size:
341.87 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: