Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 21;4(11):100590. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2022.100590

Table 2.

MR abnormalities observed in 61 of 125 (49%) individuals.

Bile duct stones 45/125 (36%)
Signal of stones T1 = 42 T2 = 45
 Hyposignal 34 (81%) 44 (98%)
 Hypersignal 3 (7%) 0 (0%)
 Hyposignal and hypersignal 3 (7%) 1 (2%)
 Isosignal 2 (6%) 0 (0%)
Number of stones
 1 4 (9%)
 2 or 3 5 (11%)
 Multiple 36 (80%)
Location of stones
 Common bile duct 3 (7%)
 Intrahepatic bile duct 37 (82%)
 Diffuse 5 (11%)
Number of liver segments affected
 1–2 28 (62%)
 3–4 12 (27%)
 ≥5 5 (11%)
Bile duct dilatation 48/125 (38%)
 At the level of stones 28 (58%)
 Outside the level of stones 15 (31%)
With no stones 3 (6%)
 Cholangitis like 2 (4%)
Complications 31 (25%)
 Contrast enhancement of biliary walls 3 (2%)
 Bile duct stenosis 3 (2%)
 Abscess 4 (3%)
 Heterogeneous signal of hepatic parenchyma 9 (7%)
 Loss of volume of hepatic segment 17 (14%)
 Dysmorphia 10 (8%)
 Portal hypertension 2 (2%)
 Cholecystitis 1 (1%)
 Pancreatitis 1 (1%)
 Cholangiocarcinoma 3 (2%)

MRI, magnetic resonance.