 Good morning. Today I'm presenting on the topic role in accuracy of MRCP with CT and USG correlation and diagnosis of suspected cases of obstructive jaundice aims and objectives of my study are to identify the role of MRCP in diagnosis of suspected causes of obstructive jaundice to compare the accuracy of MRCP in relation to CT and USG in the diagnosis of causes of obstructive jaundice, the extent associated by the attack normlies and condition of the CBD beyond the level of obstruction. The study was conducted in Department of Radiology in Divapartal Hospital, Navi, Mumbai. The study design is retrospective. Duration of the study was from May 2021 to October 2021 with a sample size of 36 patients. Inclusion criteria was all age groups, all sexes and those who underwent MRCP during study period. Exclusion criteria being patients having poor quality images, patients with high lab pathology obscuring the bilirary anatomy. The results of my study are out of 36 patients, the youngest patient was four months old and the oldest was 85 years old. The mean age of patients with beeline lesion was 37.4 years and that with malignant lesions was 46.5 years. CT characterized 15 patients to have been nine causes of obstructive jaundice out of which one case, which is 6.6% turned out to be malignant. Out of 21 cases characterized as malignant by CT, two cases that is 9.5% turned out to be benign. Out of 16 cases characterized benign by MRCP, only one case that is 6.2% turned out to be malignant, which was characterized benign by CT as well. Out of 20 cases characterized as malignant by MRCP, one case which is 5% turned out to be benign. This is a table showing a distribution of my study subjects. It was observed that majority, that is 87.3% of the patients with obstructive jaundice were between 31 to 60 years of age. The youngest patient was four months old with colidocal cyst and the oldest was 85 years old female with GBCA. Next table shows sex distribution of my study subjects with majority, 53% of patients being males, showing the evidence that there is male preponderance and hematribilary disorders. Next table shows the benign causes of obstructive jaundice with it percentages. The most common benign cause of obstructive jaundice was CBD with CBD Calculi and CBD and GB Calculi, GB Calculi and strictures, all coming up to be 75%. The least common cause for obstructive jaundice was colangitis. The next table shows malignant causes of obstructive jaundice being periampillary carcinoma, colangio carcinoma, CAGB, clad skin tumors, CA head of pancreas and metastatic compression. Most common cause being periampillary carcinoma, that is 40%, a least common cause for obstruction was metastatic compression and carcinoma of head of pancreas, that is 5% each. Next table shows distribution of benign and malignant lesions with respect to age. Malignant lesions are more common after 60 years, that is 81.9%. Benign lesions are more common in the age group 1 to 30 years, that is 83.3%. The next table shows histopathological diagnosis among the benign causes. The most common benign cause of obstructive jaundice based on histopathology was large bile duct Calculi or stones in 75% of the cases. And this is a table showing histopathological diagnosis among malignant causes. The most common malignant cause for obstructive jaundice based on histopathology was teodonal adenocarcinoma in 40% of cases, followed by colangio carcinoma and colblada carcinoma in 20% of the cases each. This table shows a comparison between the diagnostic values of CT and MRCP in causes of obstructive jaundice. For diagnosing the cause of obstructive jaundice MRCP shows greater diagnostic accuracy of 94.4% than CT with accuracy of 91.6% and USG with accuracy of 30.5%. Knowledge of advantages and disadvantages of each technique are needed to determine the appropriate work, work up of patients with these pathologies. With the introduction of MRCP in ways of procedures like ERCP can be avoided. All of our cases presented with jaundice and abdominal pain, most common sign encountered in our study was zictris. USG was able to deduct colblada Calculi in all of the cases with 100% accuracy. However, USG showed difficulty in picking up distance CVD Calculi in two patients which were diagnosed with 100% accuracy on CT and MRI. This shows that MRCP is superior to USG in detecting CVD Calculi and other distilled CVD pathologies. In our study, age group range from 4 months to 85 years with mean age group of 42 years. Most of our cases in the age group were 31 to 60 years of age. Males accounted for 53% of cases among the benign cause of obstructive jaundice CVD Calculi was most common finding constituting about 50% of benign causes. Both CT and MR showed 100% accuracy in detecting calculus and USG showed 52%. MRCP is an accurate non-invasive means of evaluating patients with obstructive jaundice. It is useful in failed ERCP cases also shows the pylori tree very well. Evaluation of areas proximal and distilled to the level of obstruction is possible. It is better than CT and USG in showing the distilled CVD and the pancreatic duct. The inherent multi-planar capability of MRCP makes it superior to other modalities and not only identifying but also characterizing these lesions. Considering few limitations of CT and USG, the invasive nature of ERCP. MRCP alone can become the imaging modality of choice for imaging patients with obstructive jaundice and it becomes even more superior by adding conventional MRI sections to it because it is non-invasive, non-ionizing, multi-planar imaging capability and no post-procedure complications. It can show biliary tract proximal as well as distilled to the site of obstruction. MRCP is extremely sensitive in detecting lesions in the biliary and pancreatic ducts. Only major drawbacks in MRCP are its expense, lesser availability and inability to take percutaneous biopsies. Recent advances in respect to MRCP. MRCP should play an important role in diagnostic and therapeutic applications in pancreatic and biliary tract pathology with interventional MRI. Few images of my cases. Case of cholelithiasis with chole-dokolithiasis, case of chole-dokosil, case of CA head of pancreas, case of clad skin tumor, case of carolis disease, a case of GB mass. These are my references. Thank you.