Endoscopic diagnosis of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma: Advances and current limitations

Table 1 Sensitivity rates for detection of malignancy by endoscopic brush cytology of a biliary stricture

Authors and year	Country	Panc cancer	Bile duct cancer	Specificity
Venu et al[21], 1990	USA	60% (3/5)	80% (20/25)	100% (88/88)
Rupp et al[22], 1990	USA	91% (21/23)	100% (6/6)	88% (7/8)
Foutch et al[23], 1991	USA	0% (0/6)	100% (5/5)	100% (3/3)
Ryan et al[24], 1991	USA	30% (6/20)	44% (4/9)	100% (17/17)
Howell et al[25], 1992	USA	0% (0/18)	50% (2/4)	100% (5/5)
Kurzawinski et al[26], 1993	Great Britain	65% (15/23)	60% (6/10)	100% (7/7)
Ferrari Júnior et al[27], 1994	USA	66% (16/29)	20% (2/10)	100% (22/22)
Ponchon et al[28], 1995	France	15% (3/20)	44% (12/25)	97% (64/66)
Sugiyama et al[29], 1996	Japan	36% (5/14)	59% (10/17)	100% (12/12)
Mansfield et al[30], 1997	Great Britain	38% (10/28)	63% (10/16)	100% (2/2)
Vandervoort et al[31], 1999	USA	11% (5/46)	30% (3/10)	100% (37/37)
Glasbrenner et al[32], 1999	Germany	35% (11/31)	80% (16/20)	90% (19/21)
Jailwala et al[33], 2000	USA	24% (11/46)	23% (7/30)	100% (29/29)
Farrell et al[34], 2001	USA	78% (14/18)	60% (6/10)	83% (10/12)
Fogel et al[35], 2006	USA	36% (32/88)	26% (10/38)	100% (8/8)
Kitajima et al[36], 2007	Japan	60% (9/15)	71% (15/21)	100% (7/7)

Table 2 Sensitivity rates for detection of malignancy by endoscopic forceps biopsy of a biliary stricture

Authors and year	Country	Panc cancer	Bile duct cancer	Specificity
Kubota et al[54], 1993	Japan	50% (2/4)	89% (16/18)	100% (5/5)
Ponchon et al[28], 1995	France	46% (6/13)	44% (7/16)	97% (35/36)
Sugiyama et al[29], 1996	Japan	71% (10/14)	88% (15/17)	100% (12/12)
Jailwala et al[33], 2000	USA	33% (15/46)	30% (9/30)	100% (10/10)
Tamada et al[59], 2002	Japan	50% (6/12)	84% (21/25)	100% (18/18)
Kitajima et al[36], 2007	Japan	60% (9/15)	57% (12/21)	100% (7/7)

Table 3 Intraductal ulytrasonography for the evaluation of longitudinal cancer extension of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma

Authors and year	Country	Route	Accuracy of IDUS
Tamada et al[110], 1995	Japan	PTBD/ERCP	68% (13/19)
Inui et al[115], 1998	Japan	PTBD/ERCP	85% (11/13)
Fujita et al[116], 1998	Japan	ERCP	80% (12/15)
Menzel et al[118], 2000	Germany	ERCP	80% (24/30)
Tamada et al[143], 2001	Japan	PTBD/ERCP	71% (25/35)
Tamada et al[145], 2001	Japan	ERCP	84% (16/19)
Kim et al[138], 2010	Korea	PTBD	92% (18/19)

PTBD: Percuteneous transhepatic biliary drainage; ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Table 4 Cholangioscopy for the evaluation of longitudinal cancer extension of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma

Authors and year	Country	Modality	Accuracy
Tamada et al[110], 1995	Japan	PTCS + mapping biopsy; PTCS + mapping biopsy + IDUS	80% (12/15); 93% (14/15)
Sato et al[42], 1998	Japan	PTCS	81% (13/16)
Kawakami et al[72], 2009	Japan	POCS; POCS + mapping biopsy	77% (10/13); 100% (13/13)
Kim et al[138], 2010	Korea	PTCS + mapping biopy; PTCS + mapping biopy + IDUS	90% (18/20); 95% (18/19)

IDUS: Intraductal ultrasonography; PTCS: Percuteneous transhepatic cholangioscopy; POCS: Peroral cholangioscopy.