Download PDF
Digestive Disease Interventions
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1802984
Invited Article

Noninvasive Imaging Methods for Bile Duct and Gallbladder Pathology: An Overview

Carla Harmath 
1   Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
,
Marta Flory 
2   Division of Body Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Evaluation of the gallbladder and biliary system with noninvasive imaging modalities is essential for pathology characterization as well as for guidance of additional diagnostic and therapeutic intervention. Ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the mainstream modalities encountered in the workup of gallbladder and biliary pathology and can be used alone or in combination. US is the modality of choice for initial workup of abnormal liver function tests and is excellent at evaluating gallbladder and bile duct pathology such as choledocholithiasis or cholecystitis. It is widely available, cost-effective, and portable. CT is a common modality for the evaluation of abdominal pain and may demonstrate biliary dilatation or other processes such as infection or neoplasms involving the biliary system, gallbladder, and involved adjacent liver parenchyma. MRI, and more specifically MR cholangiopancreatography, is the modality of choice for detailed evaluation of the intrahepatic and extrahepatic ducts. It can accurately depict biliary anatomic variants for presurgical planning, postprocedural complications, intraductal processes, and other biliary-related pathologies. MRI can also assess for bile leaks and fistulas with the use of hepatobiliary contrast agents. All these modalities provide important diagnostic information, facilitate interventional approaches, and guide clinical treatment algorithms. We review the advantages and limitations of each to help guide the provider to the modality of choice for the optimal assessment of specific gallbladder and biliary pathologies and treatment planning needs.

Keywords

biliary imaging - biliary pathology - ultrasound - magnetic resonance imaging - computed tomography


Publication History

Received: 20 December 2024

Accepted: 17 January 2025

Article published online:
18 February 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sundaram KM, Morgan MA, Itani M, Thompson W. Imaging of benign biliary pathologies. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48 (01) 106-126
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 O'Connor OJ, O'Neill S, Maher MM. Imaging of biliary tract disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 197 (04) W551-W558
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Arif-Tiwari H, Porter KK, Kamel IR. et al; Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® abnormal liver function tests. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20 (11S): S302-S314
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Russo GK, Zaheer A, Kamel IR. et al; Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® right upper quadrant pain: 2022 update. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20 (5S): S211-S223
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Bilgin M, Shaikh F, Semelka RC, Bilgin SS, Balci NC, Erdogan A. Magnetic resonance imaging of gallbladder and biliary system. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 20 (01) 31-42
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Itani M, Lalwani N, Anderson MA, Arif-Tiwari H, Paspulati RM, Shetty AS. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: pitfalls in interpretation. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48 (01) 91-105
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Thomas S, Jahangir K. Noninvasive imaging of the biliary system relevant to percutaneous interventions. Semin Intervent Radiol 2016; 33 (04) 277-282
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Horrow MM. Ultrasound of the extrahepatic bile duct: issues of size. Ultrasound Q 2010; 26 (02) 67-74
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Foley WD, Quiroz FA. The role of sonography in imaging of the biliary tract. Ultrasound Q 2007; 23 (02) 123-135
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Neitzel E, Laskus J, Mueller PR, Kambadakone A, Srinivas-Rao S, vanSonnenberg E. Part 1: Current concepts in radiologic imaging and intervention in acute cholecystitis. J Intensive Care Med 2024; x: 8 850666241259421
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Ludwig DR, Itani M, Childs DD. et al. Biliary duct dilatation: AJR expert panel narrative review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2024; 222 (04) e2329671
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Wilson SR, Burns PN, Kono Y. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of focal liver masses: a success story. Ultrasound Med Biol 2020; 46 (05) 1059-1070
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Uko II, Wood C, Nguyen E. et al. Utilizing CT to identify clinically significant biliary dilatation in symptomatic post-cholecystectomy patients: when should we be worried?. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47 (12) 4126-4138
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Feldman MK, Coppa CP. Noninvasive imaging of the biliary tree for the interventional radiologist. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2015; 18 (04) 184-196
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 de Oliveira GS, Torri GB, Gandolfi FE. et al. Computed tomography versus ultrasound for the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2024; 34 (11) 6967-6979
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Nguyen NT, Khan HA, Abdul-Baki K. et al. CT imaging features of bile duct stent complications. Clin Imaging 2023; 103: 109986
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Wyatt SH, Fishman EK. Biliary tract obstruction. The role of spiral CT in detection and definition of disease. Clin Imaging 1997; 21 (01) 27-34
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Biliary Tact Cancers. Version 2.2024. Accessed April 19, 2024 at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/btc.pdf
    PubMed
  • 19 Brandi G, Venturi M, Pantaleo MA, Ercolani G. GICO. Cholangiocarcinoma: Current opinion on clinical practice diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms: a review of the literature and a long-standing experience of a referral center. Dig Liver Dis 2016; 48 (03) 231-241
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Leng S, Toia GV, Hoodeshenas S. et al. Standardizing technical parameters and terms for abdominopelvic photon-counting CT: laying the groundwork for innovation and evidence sharing. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024; 49 (09) 3261-3273
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Onishi H, Tsuboyama T, Nakamoto A. et al. Photon-counting CT: technical features and clinical impact on abdominal imaging. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024; 49 (12) 4383-4399
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Hekimoglu K, Ustundag Y, Dusak A. et al. MRCP vs. ERCP in the evaluation of biliary pathologies: review of current literature. J Dig Dis 2008; 9 (03) 162-169
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Tomi-Tricot R, Gras V, Mauconduit F. et al. B1 artifact reduction in abdominal DCE-MRI using kT -points: first clinical assessment of dynamic RF shimming at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018; 47 (06) 1562-1571
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Feuerriegel GC, Sutter R. Managing hardware-related metal artifacts in MRI: current and evolving techniques. Skeletal Radiol 2024; 53 (09) 1737-1750
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Welle CL, Miller FH, Yeh BM. Advances in MR imaging of the biliary tract. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2020; 28 (03) 341-352
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Romagnuolo J, Bardou M, Rahme E, Joseph L, Reinhold C, Barkun AN. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected biliary disease. Ann Intern Med 2003; 139 (07) 547-557
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Bader TR, Beavers KL, Semelka RC. MR imaging features of primary sclerosing cholangitis: patterns of cirrhosis in relationship to clinical severity of disease. Radiology 2003; 226 (03) 675-685
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Singh AK, Nachiappan AC, Verma HA. et al. Postoperative imaging in liver transplantation: what radiologists should know. Radiographics 2010; 30 (02) 339-351
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Park HJ, Kim SY, Kim HJ. et al. Intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct: clinical, imaging, and pathologic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 211 (01) 67-75
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Yoon HJ, Kim YK, Jang KT. et al. Intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile ducts: description of MRI and added value of diffusion-weighted MRI. Abdom Imaging 2013; 38 (05) 1082-1090
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Sugimoto M, Yasuda H, Koda K. et al. Image overlay navigation by markerless surface registration in gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2010; 17 (05) 629-636
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar