Intrahepatic biliary duct branching patterns,cystic duct anomalies,and pancreas divisum in a tertiary referral center: A magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticographic study

Background

Knowledge about anatomic variations in intrahepatic biliary ducts (IHBD) is relevant for performing biliary drainage and for avoiding bile duct injury during cholecystectomy and liver resections. Low insertion of cystic duct (LICD) is a common anatomic variant. Pancreas divisum is the commonest congenital anomaly of pancreas; it has been causally linked with recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP).

Methods

Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP) images of 500 consecutive patients were reviewed for anatomic variants of IHBD, cystic duct, and pancreatic duct.

Results

Anatomy of IHBD could be evaluated in 458 MRCP’s, of these 301 (65.72 %) had ‘typical’ anatomy. The variant in 157 persons included ‘triple confluence’ in 56 (12.23 %), ‘right posterior segmental duct (RPSD) draining to left hepatic duct (LHD)’ in 64 (14 %), ‘RPSD to common hepatic duct (CHD)’ in 20 (4.4 %), ‘RPSD to cystic duct’ in 2 (0.4 %), ‘accessory duct to CHD’ in 3 (0.7 %), ‘accessory duct to right hepatic duct (RHD)’ in 1 (0.2 %), ‘segment 2 and 3 separately to CHD’ in 1 (0.2 %), and complex variants in 10 (2.2 %). Cystic duct could be evaluated in 338 patients; of these, 15 (4.4 %) had LICD. Patients with RAP had pancreas divisum more often than those without any pancreatic disease, (?/?,10 % and ?/?, 0.8 %; p?=?0.004).

Conclusions

Nearly one third of MRCPs showed atypical IHBD pattern with RPSD draining to LHD being the commonest. LICD was the most common cystic duct variant. Pancreas divisum was more frequent in patients with RAP than in persons without pancreatic disease.

     

A prospective comparison of the yield of EUS in primary vs. recurrent idiopathic acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether EUS should be performed after a single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis vs. recurrent episodes or if clinical factors can predict positive EUS findings. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis or with recurrent episodes underwent EUS (with analysis of bile for bilirubinate and cholesterol crystals, when possible). The diagnostic yield was compared for patients with a single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis and recurrent episodes (stratified by cholecystectomy status). Predictors of positive EUS findings were sought. EUS was considered "positive" if it identified any possible cause of pancreatitis other than chronic pancreatitis. RESULTS: A total of 370 patients were studied (246 no-cholecystectomy group [134 single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis, 112 recurrent episodes] and 124 post-cholecystectomy group [67 single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis, 57 recurrent episodes]). Overall, EUS yielded a positive finding in 29.2%. For patients in the no-cholecystectomy group, positive EUS findings were not significantly more frequent in those with a single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis vs. those with recurrent episodes (31.3% vs. 32.1%; p = 0.89). In the post-cholecystectomy group, the yield was not significantly different for single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis (29.9%) vs. recurrent episodes (17.5%) ( p = 0.15). Chronic pancreatitis was the only abnormality identified in 30.9% of patients in the no-cholecystectomy group vs. 26.6% of those in the post-cholecystectomy group ( p = 0.24). It was the most common abnormality found in all 4 subgroups (range 16.4%-42.0%) and was approximately twice as frequent in patients with recurrent episodes vs. a single episode of idiopathic pancreatitis (no-cholecystectomy: 42.0% vs. 21.6%, p = 0.0008; post-cholecystectomy: 38.6% vs. 16.4%, p = 0.008). Analysis of bile revealed crystals in 38/80 (47.5%) patients in whom it could be performed. Patients with positive EUS findings tended to be older. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with idiopathic pancreatitis, the yield of EUS is not significantly different after an initial attack or after recurrent attacks. Therefore, it is reasonable to perform EUS after an initial attack of idiopathic acute pancreatitis, especially in older patients.     

Determinants of progression of coronary artery calcification in type 2 diabetes role of glycemic control and inflammatory/vascular calcification markers.

OBJECTIVES: This study prospectively evaluated the relationship between cardiovascular risk factors, selected biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [hs-CRP], interleukin [IL]-6, and osteoprotegerin [OPG]), and the progression of coronary artery calcification (CAC) in type 2 diabetic subjects. BACKGROUND: Coronary artery calcification is pathognomonic of coronary atherosclerosis. Osteoprotegerin is a signaling molecule involved in bone remodeling that has been implicated in the regulation of vascular calcification and atherogenesis. METHODS: Three hundred ninety-eight type 2 diabetic subjects without prior coronary disease or symptoms (age 52 +/- 8 years, 61% male, glycated hemoglobin [HbA(1)c] 8 +/- 1.5) were evaluated serially by CAC imaging (mean follow-up 2.5 +/- 0.4 years). Progression/regression of CAC was defined as a change > or =2.5 between the square root transformed values of baseline and follow-up volumetric CAC scores. Demographic data, risk factors, glycemic control, medication use, serum hs-CRP, IL-6, and plasma OPG levels were measured at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven patients (53%) had CAC at baseline. One hundred eighteen patients (29.6%) had CAC progression, whereas 3 patients (0.8%) had regression. Age, male gender, hypertension, baseline CAC, HbA(1)c >7, waist-hip ratio, IL-6, OPG, use of beta-blockers, calcium channel antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, statins, and Framingham/UKPDS (United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study) risk scores were univariable predictors of CAC progression. In the multivariate model, baseline CAC (odds ratio [OR] for CAC >400 = 6.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.63 to 15.5, p < 0.001), HbA(1)c >7 (OR 1.95, CI 1.08 to 3.52, p = 0.03), and statin use (OR 2.27, CI 1.38 to 3.73, p = 0.001) were independent predictors of CAC progression. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline CAC severity and suboptimal glycemic control are strong risk factors for CAC progression in type 2 diabetic subjects.     

Differences in the management and prognosis of women and men who suffer from acute coronary syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this research was to determine if sex and gender differences in the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are associated with differences in prognosis after ACS. BACKGROUND: Previous investigators have reported sex/gender differences in the management of patients with ACS, but the impact of these differences on prognosis is unclear. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial, which enrolled 4,836 women and 7,726 men with ACS. Patients were classified into risk strata using the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score. RESULTS: Women underwent fewer invasive procedures including angiography, angioplasty, and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery (47.6% vs. 60.5%; p = 0.0001) compared to men. No significant differences in cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke were observed (9.8% vs. 10.9%; p = 0.04), although women were more likely than men to develop refractory ischemia and to be rehospitalized for chest pain during follow-up (16.6% vs. 13.9%; p = 0.0001). These differences were particularly evident among TIMI high-risk women. A significant interaction between TIMI risk and gender for the outcome of refractory angina and rehospitalization for angina was present. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to men, high-risk women with ACS undergo less coronary angiography, angioplasty, and CABG surgery, and while they do not have higher incidence cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, or stroke, they suffer an increased rate of refractory ischemia and rehospitalization. All high-risk women and men with ACS should receive optimal medical management, and be considered for coronary angiography with possible revascularization if their coronary anatomy warrants it.