Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 25547

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2021 | Month : July | Volume : 15 | Issue : 7 | Page : TC09 - TC12 Full Version

Assessment of Malignant Biliary Obstruction by Percutaneous Transhepatic Cholangiography: A Prospective Cohort Study


Published: July 1, 2021 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2021/50270.15137
Tushant Kumar, Pramod Kumar Dixit, Pramod Kumar Singh

1. Associate Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, TS Mishra Medical College and Hospital, Lucknow, Pradesh, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Institute of Medical Sciences, BHU, Varanasi Uttar Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Tushant Kumar,
Associate Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: drskjain2005@rediffmail.com; medicine.tushant@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Malignant Biliary Obstruction (MBO) is caused by hepatic metastasis, gall bladder carcinoma, other distant metastasis, icteric hepatocellular carcinoma and lymphoma. Different signs and symptoms of obstruction includes pruritus, jaundice, altered food taste, renal dysfunction, anorexia, malnutrition which ultimately leads to impaired immune dysfunction and impaired quality of life.

Aim: To determine the extent of biliary ductal involvement in patients with MBO through Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and Percutaneous Transhepatic Cholangiography (PTC) technique and to compare the number of biliary drainage required.

Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was undertaken at Department of Radiodiagnosis, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India. It included total 40 patients (24 females and 16 males) with strong clinicopathological and laboratory investigation suspicious of MBO. Patients with suspected MBO were examined with MR cholangiography. All patients then underwent PTC and Biliary Drainage (PTBD) and/or stent placement after MR cholangiography. The statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21.0.

Results: As out of 40 patients, 16 (40%) were males and 24 (60%) were females and the mean age was 53.87±9.49 years with maximum age noted to be 75 years and minimum age of patient in study was 35 years. The most common block observed on MRCP was type IIIA (35%) and after MRCP the distribution of level of hilar block on PTC was obtained with the most common block found was of type II (32.5%). Maximum number of biliary drains during PTBD was three. In MRCP three biliary drain were used in 47.5% patients while in PTC it was used only in 40% patients.

Conclusion: Based on diagnostic performance, PTC was found to be superior for the assessment of MBO. PTC played an important role in scheduling the therapeutic strategy for malignant biliary stricture.

Keywords

Benign biliary obstruction, Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, Secondary hepatic malignancies

The Malignant Biliary Obstruction (MBO) most commonly results from pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma ampullary carcinomas and adenopathy (1),(2). Other aetiologies includes primary or secondary hepatic malignancies, gall bladder carcinoma, lymphoma and other distant metastasis. MBO generally presents with painless jaundice and biliary obstruction may spoil the quality of life (3),(4) and consequently pruritus, cholangitis and liver failure occurs (5),(6). The gold standard procedure for assessment of the biliary obstruction is direct cholangiography and biliary drainage can be attained surgically through PTC. The employment of this approach will depend on whether the carcinoma is operable and its location. PTC facilitates external and internal biliary tree drainage and is the primary method of relieving biliary obstruction for malignant lesions above the level of the common hepatic duct (7). PTC is a non invasive process which confirms the diagnosis and characterises the biliary obstruction; it is advantageous in screening of high risk patients by determining the pretherapeutic staging.

PTC is usually considered superior to Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for assessment of the biliary ducts in hilar obstruction, particularly when there is a complete obstruction of the biliary duct. Though, incomplete opacification of intrahepatic ducts is not an unusual incident (8). Manifold projections with tilting and rolling of the patient are frequently essential to improve the diagnostic accurateness of PTC (9). Even though PTC is considered as safe practice, severe and even fatal procedure-related complications have also been reported and it varies between 3.4% and 4.8% (10). The aim of this study was to assess the extent of biliary ductal involvement in patients with MBO through MRCP and PTC technique and to compare the number of biliary drainage required.

Material and Methods

This prospective cohort study was conducted at Department of Radiodiagnosis, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India, from May 2016 to August 2017, after obtaining the approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC Reg. No.48/15), all eligible patients and their guardians received a complete elucidation of the nature and purpose of the study. Written informed consent from the patients (or their Legal guardian) enrolled in the study was obtained. All the 40 cases came during stated period were included in the study.

Inclusion criteria: All patients with strong clinicopathological and laboratory investigation suspicious of MBO, which mandates the prospective imaging and percutaneous intervention and these 40 patients have unresectable disease or were not suitable candidates for surgery were included.

Exclusion criteria: Patient with clinicopathological and laboratory investigation suspicious of benign biliary obstruction were excluded from the study.

The patients included were willing and reliable for follow-up and all the 40 patients came for follow-up and signed the study specific consent form.

Magnetic Resonance Cholangiography

Patients with suspected MBO were examined with MR cholangiography. MR images were evaluated by two radiologists to decide the extent of biliary ductal involvement. A hypothetical plan for biliary drainage was established prior to any intervention. All patients then underwent PTBD and/or stent placement after MR cholangiography. PTC technique was used as the standard of reference, to evaluate the role of MR cholangiography in defining the extent of biliary ductal involvement. The radiologists determined the severity of biliary ductal involvement by using the classification proposed by Bismuth H and Corlette MB (11):

Type I obstruction takes place distal to the confluence of the right and left hepatic ducts known as primary confluence,

Type II obstruction involves the primary confluence but not the secondary confluences while

Type III involves the primary confluence and either the right (type IIIA) or the left (type IIIB) secondary confluence, and

Type IV obstruction involves the secondary confluence of the both the right and left hepatic ducts. The type of drainage performed was compared with the type of obstruction that had been anticipated at MR cholangiography.

PTC and Drainage

Percutaneous interventions were performed by an interventional radiologist in accordance to MR cholangiographic result. All patients underwent PTC, and biliary drainage and/or stent placement after MR cholangiography. The best access route for drainage was established by the interventional radiologist by using results of these imaging examinations, and the specific type of drainage procedure performed were established with PTC findings. Drainage was performed under local/epidural anaesthesia and mild sedation. Broad-spectrum antibiotics were administered to patient prior to procedure. Access to the biliary ductal system was done by puncture through ultrasound guidence. After puncture and opacification of a dilated peripheral duct, biliary drainage was performed by using a coaxial 18 gauge needle (Vygon, UK). The stricture was traversed by using hydrophilic guide wires (Radifocus wire, Terumo). For catheter drainage, 10-french Mallecot’s Catheter (Ultrathane; Devon) were used. Metallic stents or plastic stents were placed wherever required. The technique for placing stents in a linear, Y- or T-shaped configuration was used as reported (12). Any number after this procedure related complications were recorded, and patients were followed-up clinically with physical examination after the biliary intervention. In addition, bilirubin levels were measured four weeks after the procedure.

Statistical Analysis

The data were entered in microsoft excel spreadsheet and analysis was done using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21.0. Categorical variables were presented in number and percentage. Qualitative variables were compared using Pearson Coefficient. The p-value of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 40 patients were included in final analysis of which 28 patients were due to gall bladder carcinomas and 12 were due to cholangiocarcinoma. Pre PTBD bilirubin level ranges from 8-22 mg/dL in these patients. 16 (40%) were males and 24 (60%) were females and the mean age was 53.87±9.49 years with maximum age noted to be 75 years and minimum age of patient in study was 35 years (Table/Fig 1).

The most common block observed on MRCP was type IIIA (35%), after MRCP the distribution of level of hilar block on PTC was obtained, the most common block found was type II Block (32.5%) (Table/Fig 2).

On PTC the gender wise distribution of most common type II block present in 6 males and 7 females (Table/Fig 3) and among the patients of the age group 51-65 years (total 20 patients) type II block was present in 50% (10 patients) (Table/Fig 4).

The gender wise distribution obtained on PTC for number of biliary drains to be used in PTBD was three biliary drain used in 6 males and in 10 females (Table/Fig 5).

Three biliary drain were used in the 16 (40%) patients followed by two biliary drain which was used in 14 (35%) patients and among the patients of the age group 35-50 years (17 patients) three biliary drain was used in 11 patients (64.7%) (Table/Fig 6).

(Table/Fig 7) showed the comparison of number of biliary drains to be used during PTBD in MRCP and PTC. In MRCP 3 biliary drain was used in 19 (47.5%) patients while in PTC was used only in 16 (40%) patients.

The bilirubin level 4 weeks post PTBD comes down to almost normal level and was less than 4 mg/dL in all the patients. Temporary haemobilia occurred in five patients during PTC. Minimal bile leakage was observed in four patients. No case fatality seen during and after four weeks of PTC.

There was difference in four patients in planning of drainage, as their levels of blocks were wrongly estimated on MRCP and differed from the final PTC findings. The accuracy of MRCP in planning the number of biliary drains were 90% (36 out of 40) based on the findings for level of block perspective planning for percutaneous drainage of the patients were planned and number of biliary drains were estimated which were found to be in correlation to the final PTC based planning (Pearson’s correlation coefficient=0.909, two-tailed test of significance, p≤0.001) (Table/Fig 8).

Discussion

In patients with unresectable MBO, management of biliary obstruction is of utmost importance. Impaired biliary drainage not only severely affects the prospect of systemic therapy in inoperable MBO but also reduces quality of life with increase in morbidity and mortality rate (13). There are several studies where it was reported that quality of life can be improved through biliary drainage (14),(15). Although non invasive imaging are known to be an indicative method which provides information of the existence of biliary stricture and the extent of bile duct dilation (16) but alone it cannot confirm the pathological diagnosis of MBO, hence to confirm diagnosis it is mandatory to ascertain the optimal sampling procedure. MRCP, considered as a replacement for diagnostic ERCP, is a widely employed technique that can provide instinctive and consistent information about the pancreaticobiliary duct (17). However, Sun N et al., in their observation found that MRCP images are heavily T2-weighted with deficient soft tissue contrast and usually highlighting water hence they considered MRCP not to be appropriate for monitoring lesions and structure exterior to the lumen or for the qualitative diagnosis of bile duct obstruction (18).

PTC is a technique that has been in exercise since the 1960s for the diagnosis of biliary stricture and its management (19). Along with relief in symptom it offers character and degree of the occlusion which is necessary for the diagnosis. In present study, minor complications like temporary haemobilia and bile leakage was found during PTC which was in accordance to the several studies (20),(21),(22). The level of biliary obstruction decides the type of biliary drainage (23). There are studies from England where when ERCP has unsuccessful PTBD is frequently the preferred technique for lesions above the common hepatic duct (7),(24). In this study, it was found that number of biliary drainage was more in MRCP than PTC during PTBD. In a very recent cohort study Rees J et al., suggested to identify associated risk factors prior to PTBD, and to confirm that the patient is expected to get benefit from PTBD, in terms of either relief in symptoms or as a link to chemotherapy (25), in this study too, observed relief in symptoms after PTBD and the planning of PTBD after MRCP and PTC helped in knowing the best route and any anomalous biliary anatomy was known before hand which helped in overall success rate of PTBD which is also in accordance to a recent systematic review it was concluded that PTBD was associated with higher rates of successful biliary drainage and lower rates of cholangitis (26). Normal bilirubin levels 4 weeks after PTBD was observed which was also reported in several studies where a significant decrease in plasma bilirubin was observed during the first week after PTBD (27),(28),(29),(30). There is several data which after comparison of different technique suggested PTBD as superior technique for achieving complete drainage of MBO (31),(32),(33).

Limitation(s)

The sample size in this study was less and long term follow-up could not be done. PTC is an invasive procedure and needs expertise and experience to do the complication free procedure. This procedure cannot be done in patients having ascites due to high risk bleeding from liver surface.

Conclusion

The present study demonstrated superiority of diagnostic performance of PTC for the assessment of MBO and increasing the positioning and qualitative diagnostic accuracy. Although MRCP was found to be accurate in terms of delineating blocks and directing towards the causes of block but PTC played an important role in scheduling the therapeutic strategy for malignant biliary stricture.

Author’s contribution: PKD and PKS contributed in form of MRCP image presentation and manuscript prepration.

References

1.
Tillich M, Mischinger HJ, Preisegger KH, Rabi H, Szolar DH. Multiphasic helical CT in diagnosis and staging of hilarcholangiocarcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:651-58. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Zidi SH, Prat F, Le Guen L, Rondeua Y, Pelletier G. Performance characteristics of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the staging of malignant hilar strictures. Gut. 2000;46:103-06. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Abraham NS, Barkun JS, Barkun AN. Palliation of malignant biliary obstruction: A prospective trial examining impact on quality of life. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:835-41. [crossref]
4.
Robson PC, Heffernan N, Gonen M, Thornton R, Brody LA, Holmes R, et al. Prospective study of outcomes after percutaneous biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2303-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Chu D, Adler DG. Malignant biliary tract obstruction: Evaluation and therapy. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010;8:1033-44. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
vanDelden OM, Lameris JS. Percutaneous drainage and stenting for palliation of malignant bile duct obstruction. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:448-56. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Silva MA, Tekin K, Aytekin F, Bramhall SR, Buckels JAC, Mirja DF. Surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma; a 10 year experience of a tertiary referral centre in the UK. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31:533-39. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Mueller PR, Ferrucci JT, vanSonnenberg E, Warshaw AL, Simeone JF, Cronan JJ, et al. Obstruction of the left hepatic duct: Diagnosis and treatment by selective fine-needle cholangiography and percutaneous biliary drainage. Radiology. 1982;145:297-302. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Mueller PR, Harbin WP, Ferrucci JT, Wittenberg J, vanSonnenberg E. Fine-needle transhepatic cholangiography: Reflections after 450 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981;136:85-90. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Harbin WP, Mueller PR, Ferrucci JT. Transhepatic cholangiography: Complications and use patterns of the fine-needle technique. Radiology. 1980;135:15-22. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Bismuth H, Corlette MB. Intrahepatic cholangioenteric anastomosis in carcinoma of the hilus of the liver. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1975;140:170-78.
12.
LaBerge JM, Doherty M, Gordon RL, Ring EJ. Hilar malignancy: Treatment with an expandable metallic transhepatic biliary stent. Radiology. 1990;177:793-97. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Stark A, Hines OJ. Endoscopic and operative palliation strategies for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Semin Oncol. 2015;42:163-76. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Barkay O, Mosler P, Schmitt CM, Lehman GA, Frakes JT, Johanson JF, et al Effect of endoscopic stenting of malignant bile duct obstruction on quality of life. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2013;47:526-31. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Sultana A, Smith CT, Cunningham D, Starling N, Neoptolemos JP, Ghaneh P. Meta-analyses of chemotherapy for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2607-15. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Weber A, Schmid RM, Prinz C. Diagnostic approaches for cholangiocarcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:4131-36. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Irie H, Honda H, Shinozaki K, Yoshimitsu K, Aibe H, Nishie A, et al. MR imaging of ampullary carcinomas. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2002;26:711-17. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Sun N, Xu Q, Liu X, Liu W, Wang J. Comparison of preoperative evaluation of malignant low level biliary obstruction using plain magnetic resonance and coronal liver acquisition with volume acceleration technique alone and in combination Eur J Med Res. 2015;20:92. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Maire F, Hammel P, Ponsot P, Aubert A, O’Toole D, Hentic O, et al. Long-term outcome of biliary and duodenal stents in palliative treatment of patients with unresectable adenocarcinoma of the head of pancreas. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:735-42. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Li Z, Li TF, Ren JZ, Li WC, Ren JL, Shul SF, et al. Value of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy for pathologic diagnosis of obstructive jaundice: Analysis of 826 cases. Acta Radiol. 2017;58:03-09. [crossref] [PubMed]
21.
Fohlen A, Bazille C, Menahem B, Jegonday MA, Dupont B, Pennec VL. Transhepatic forceps biopsy combined with biliary drainage in obstructive jaundice: Safety and accuracy. Eur Radiol. 2019;29:2426-35. [crossref] [PubMed]
22.
Ierardi AM, Mangini M, Fontana F, Floridi C, Marchi GD, Petrillo M, et al. Usefulness and safety of biliary percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy (PTFB): Our experience. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2014;29:96-101. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
Gouma DJ, Roughneen PT, Kumar S, Moody FG, Rowlands BJ. Changes in nutritional status associated with obstructive jaundice and biliary drainage in rats. Am J Clin Nutr. 1986;44:362-69. [crossref] [PubMed]
24.
Rösch T, Hofrichter K, Frimberger E, Meining A, Born P, Weigert N, et al. ERCP or EUS for tissue diagnosis of biliary strictures? A prospective comparative study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:390-96. [crossref]
25.
Rees J, Mytton J, Evison F, Mangat KS, Patel P, Trudgill N. The outcomes of biliary drainage by percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography for the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction in England between 2001 and 2014: A retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2020;10:e033576. [crossref] [PubMed]
26.
Moole H, Dharmapuri S, Duvvuri A, Dharmapuri S, Boddireddy R, Moole V, et al. Endoscopic versus percutaneous biliary drainage in palliation of advanced malignant hilar obstruction: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Can J Gastroenterol. 2016;2016:4726078. [crossref] [PubMed]
27.
Robson PC, Heffernan N, Gonen M, Thornton R, Brody LA, Holmes R, et al. Prospective study of outcomes after percutaneous biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2303-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
28.
Sut M, Kennedy R, McNamee J, Collins A, Clements B. Long-term results of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiographic drainage for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. J Palliat Med. 2010;13:1311-13. [crossref] [PubMed]
29.
Asadi H, Hollingswoth R, Pennycooke K, Thanaratnam P, Given M, Keeling A, et al. A review of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage at a tertiary referral centre. Clin Radiol. 2016;71:1312.e07-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
30.
Heedman PA, Astradsson E, Blomquist K, Sjodahl R. Palliation of malignant biliary obstruction: Adverse events are common after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Scandinavian Journal of Surgery. 2018;107(1):48-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
31.
Paik WH, Park YS, Hwang JH, Lee SH, Yoon CJ, Kang SG, et al. Palliative treatment with self-expandable metallic stents in patients with advanced type III or IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma: A percutaneous versus endoscopic approach. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:55-62. [crossref] [PubMed]
32.
Kloek JJ, van der Gaag NA, Aziz Y, Rauws EAJ, Delden OMV, Lameris JS, et al. Endoscopic and percutaneous preoperative biliary drainage in patients with suspected hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:119-25. [crossref] [PubMed]
33.
Hameed A, Pang T, Chiou J, Pleass H, Lam V, Hollands M, et al. Percutaneous vs. endoscopic preoperative biliary drainage in hilar cholangiocarcinoma-A systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford). 2016;18:400-10. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

10.7860/JCDR/2021/50270.15137

Date of Submission: May 09, 2021
Date of Peer Review: May 28, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Jun 15, 2021
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2021

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: May 10, 2021
• Manual Googling: Jun 14, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Jun 17, 2021 (16%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com