CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Double duct sign

radiologic sign

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 3, 2025
Entity authorityQ131926699
Source-derived summary

The double duct sign is a radiological finding characterized by the simultaneous dilation of the common bile duct and the main pancreatic duct. This sign is significant because it often indicates an obstruction in the distal bile duct and pancreatic duct, frequently caused by serious underlying pathologies such as pancreatic carcinoma or periampullary tumors. The double duct sign is most commonly visualized on imaging modalities such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Pathophysiology

The double duct sign results from the anatomical convergence of the biliary and pancreatic ducts at the ampulla of Vater, where obstructions can disrupt the drainage of both systems simultaneously. Common causes of such obstructions include pancreatic adenocarcinoma, periampullary cancer, cholangiocarcinoma, chronic pancreatitis, gallstone-related obstruction and strictures.

Imaging features

Ultrasound: May show dilated common bile duct and main pancreatic duct, but is less reliable in visualizing both ducts simultaneously.

Computed Tomography: Non-contrast and contrast-enhanced CT may demonstrate dilation of both ducts and identify an underlying mass in the pancreas or ampulla, if present.

Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP): Non-invasive procedure, that clearly shows dilated CBD and MPD and may help pinpoint the obstruction site.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP): A diagnostic and therapeutic tool, ERCP provides high-resolution imaging of the biliary and pancreatic ducts. It is particularly useful for biopsy or stenting if malignancy is suspected.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Double duct sign” as radiologic sign. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Double, duct and sign.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 221-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Double, duct and sign providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Double duct sign”, the useful work is to connect “radiologic sign” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 3, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q131926699. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Double duct sign”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Double duct sign primary sources, Double duct sign archive and Double research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Double duct sign”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Double duct sign” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.