TABLE 2.
Case number | Sonographic Murphy sign | Enlargement | Sonolucent layer | Major axis (mm) | Minor axis (mm) | Wall thickness (mm) | Remarks |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ETGBD successful | |||||||
1 | (+) | (−) | (−) | 40.0 | 30.0 | 5.3 | – |
2 | (+) | (+) | (−) | 85.0 | 35.0 | 5.4 | – |
3 | (+) | (−) | (−) | 62.0 | 24.0 | 2.0 | – |
4 | (+) | (+) | (−) | 77.0 | 25.0 | 4.1 | – |
5 | (+) | (−) | (−) | 89.0 | 23.0 | 4.0 | – |
Mean | 70.6 | 27.4 | 4.2 | – | |||
ETGBD unsuccessful | |||||||
8 | (+) | (+) | (+) | 105.0 | 35.0 | 14.0 | – |
9 | (+) | (+) | (+) | 83.0 | 36.0 | 7.0 | – |
10 | (+) | (+) | (−) | 93.0 | 41.0 | 4.9 | – |
11 | (+) | (+) | (+) | 88.0 | 40.0 | 10.2 | Cystic duct perforation |
Mean | 92.3 | 38.0 | 9.0 | – |
Two of the 11 cases were ineligible for ETGBD. These included case number 6, with no ultrasonographic records; and case number 7, due to gallbladder cancer. (−) Not present; (+) Present