Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Assessment of Differential Diagnostic Methods in Infants with Cholestasis due to Biliary Atresia or Non-Biliary Atresia

  • Published:
Current Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The different methods in differentiating biliary atresia (BA) from non-BA-related cholestasis were evaluated in order to provide a practical basis for a rapid, early and accurate differential diagnosis of the diseases. 396 infants with cholestatic jaundice were studied prospectively during the period of May 2007 to June 2011. The liver function in all subjects was tested. All cases underwent abdominal ultrasonography and duodenal fluid examination. Most cases were subjected to hepatobiliary scintigraphy, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and a percutaneous liver biopsy. The diagnosis of BA was finally made by cholangiography or histopathologic examination. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of these various methods were compared. 178 patients (108 males and 70 females with a mean age of 58±30 days) were diagnosed as having BA. 218 patients (136 males and 82 females with a mean age of 61 ±24 days) were diagnosed as having non-BA etiologies of cholestasis jaundice during the follow-up period in which jaundice faded after treatment with medical therapy. For diagnosis of BA, clinical evaluation, hepatomegaly, stool color, serum gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase (GGT), duodenal juice color, bile acid in duodenal juice, ultrasonography (gallbladder), ultrasonography (griangular cord or strip-apparent hyperechoic foci), hepatobiliary scintigraphy, MRCP, liver biopsy had an accuracy of 76.0%, 51.8%, 84.3%, 70.0%, 92.4%, 98.0%, 90.4%, 67.2%, 85.3%, 83.2% and 96.6%, a sensitivity of 83.1%, 87.6%, 96.1%, 73.7%, 90.4%, 100%, 92.7%, 27.5%, 100%, 89.0% and 97.4%, a specificity of 70.2%, 77.5%, 74.8%, 67.0%, 94.0%, 96.3%, 88.5%, 99.5%, 73.3%, 75.4% and 94.3%, a positive predictive value of 69.0%, 72.6%, 75.7%, 64.6%, 92.5%, 95.7%, 86.8%, 98.0%, 75.4%, 82.6% and 98.0%, and a negative predictive value of 83.6%, 8.5%, 95.9%, 75.7%, 92.3%, 100%, 84.2%, 93.7%, 100%, 84.0% and 92.6%, respectively. It was concluded that all the differential diagnosis methods are useful. The test for duodenal drainage and elements is fast and accurate. It is helpful in the differential diagnosis of BA and non-BA etiologies of cholestasis. It shows good practical value clinically.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moyer V, Freese DK, Whitington PF, etal. Guideline for the evaluation of cholestatic jaundice in infants: recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr, 2004, 39(2): 115–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mowat AP, Psacharopoulos HT, Williams R. Extrahepatic biliary atresia versus neonatal hepatitis. Review of 137 prospectively investigated infants. Arch Dis Child, 1976, 51(10): 763–770

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fawaz R, Baumann U, Ekong U, etal. Guideline for the Evaluation of Cholestatic Jaundice in Infants. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr, 2017, 64(1): 154–168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Balistreri WF. Neonatal cholestasis. J Pediatr, 1985, 106(2): 171–184

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. McKiernan PJ. Neonatal cholestasis. Semin Neonatal, 2002, 7(2): 153–165

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Martin SR, Atkison P, Anand R, etal. Studies of Pediatric Liver Transplantation 2002: patient and graft survival and rejection in pediatric recipients of a first liver transplant in the United States and Canada. Pediatr Transplant, 2004, 8(3): 273–283

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Devictor D, Tissieres P. Pediatric liver transplantation: where do we stand? Where we are going to? Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2013, 7(7): 629–641

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hollon J, Eide M, Gorman G. Early diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary atresia in an open-access medical system. PLoS One, 2012,7(11): e49 643

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Murase N, Uchida H, Ono Y, etal. A New era of laparoscopic revision of Kasai portoenterostomy for the treatment of biliary atresia. Biomed Res Int, 2015,2015:173 014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rafeey M, Saboktakin L, ShoaHassani J, etal. Diagnostic value of procalcitonin and apo-e in extrahepatic biliary atresia. Iran J Pediatr, 2014, 24(5): 623–629

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Madsen SS, Kvist N, Thorup J. Increased conjugated bilirubin is sufficient to initiate screening for biliary atresia. Dan Med J, 2015,62(8): A5114

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lu FT, Wu JF, Hsu HY, etal. Gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase level as a screening marker among diverse etiologies of infantile intrahepatic cholestasis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr, 2014, 59(6): 695–701

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dehghani SM, Haghighat M, Imanieh MH, etal. Comparison of different diagnostic methods in infants with cholestasis. World J Gastroenterol, 2006, 12(36): 5893–5896

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu B, Cai J, Xu Y, etal. Three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of biliary atresia in infants and neonates. PLoS One, 2014,9(2): e88268

    Google Scholar 

  15. Davenport M. Biliary atresia. Semin Pediatr Surg, 2005,14(1): 42–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sinha CK, Davenport M. Biliary atresia. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg, 2008, 13(2): 49–56

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. McKiernan PJ, Baker AJ, Kelly DA. The frequency and outcome of biliary atresia in the UK and Ireland. Lancet, 2000, 355(9197): 25–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hoerning A, Raub S, Dechene A, etal. Diversity of disorders causing neonatal cholestasis~the experience of a tertiary pediatric center in Germany. Front-Pediatr, 2014,2(65): 3389

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shneider BL, Brown MB, Haber B, etal. Amulticenter study of the outcome of biliary atresia in the United States, 1997 to 2000. J Pediatr, 2006, 148(4): 467–474

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Larrosa-Haro A, Caro-Lopez AM, Coello-Ramirez P, etal. Duodenal tube test in the diagnosis of biliaryatresia. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr, 2001, 32(3): 311–315

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Benchimol EI, Walsh CM, Ling SC. Early diagnosis of neonatal cholestatic jaundice: test at 2 weeks. Can Fam Physician, 2009, 55(12): 1184–1192

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Stipsanelli K, Koutsikos J, Papantoniou V, etal. Hepatobiliary scintigraphy and gamma-GT levels in the differential diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary atresia. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2007, 51(1): 74–81

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Jaw TS, Kuo YT, Liu GC, etal. MR cholangiography in the evaluation of neonatal cholestasis. Radiology, 1999, 212(1): 249–256

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Norton KI, Glass RB, Kogan D, etal. MR cholangiography in the evaluation of neonatal cholestasis: initial results. Radiology, 2002, 222(3): 687–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ohhama Y, Shinkai M, Fujita S, etal. Early prediction of long-term survival and the timing of liver transplantation after the Kasai operation. J Pediatr Surg, 2000,35(7): 1031 -1034

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kahn E. Biliary atresia revisited. Pediatr Dev Pathol, 2004, 7(2): 109–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Wuhan, 430030, China

    Chen Dong  (董 賝), Hui-yun Zhu  (朱慧云), Xiao-ping Luo  (罗小平) & Zhi-hua Huang  (黄志华)

  2. Department of Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China

    Yun-chao Chen  (陈云超)

Authors
  1. Chen Dong  (董 賝)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hui-yun Zhu  (朱慧云)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yun-chao Chen  (陈云超)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiao-ping Luo  (罗小平)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhi-hua Huang  (黄志华)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Chen Dong  (董 賝), Xiao-ping Luo  (罗小平) or Zhi-hua Huang  (黄志华).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dong, C., Zhu, Hy., Chen, Yc. et al. Clinical Assessment of Differential Diagnostic Methods in Infants with Cholestasis due to Biliary Atresia or Non-Biliary Atresia. CURR MED SCI 38, 137–143 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-018-1857-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-018-1857-6

Key words

Search

Navigation