Gardner Timothy B, Chahal Prabhleen, Papachristou Georgios I, Vege Santhi Swaroop, Petersen Bret T, Gostout Christopher J, Topazian Mark D, Takahashi Naoki, Sarr Michael G, Baron Todd H
Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 May;69(6):1085-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.06.061. Epub 2009 Feb 24.
Endoscopic therapy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) via direct intracavitary debridement is described.
To compare direct endoscopic necrosectomy with conventional transmural endoscopic drainage for the treatment of WOPN.
Retrospective, comparative study.
Academic tertiary-care center.
Patients referred to Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, since April 1998 for endoscopic drainage of WOPN.
Each patient underwent standard endoscopic drainage that consisted of transmural cavity puncture, dilation of the fistula tract, and placement of a large-bore stent(s). Patients were classified into the direct endoscopic necrosectomy group if, during any of their procedures, adjunctive direct endoscopic necrosectomy was performed; all others were in the standard drainage group.
Success was defined as resolution of the necrotic cavity without the need for operative or percutaneous intervention.
Forty-five patients were identified who met study criteria: 25 underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy, and 20 underwent standard endoscopic drainage. There were no differences in baseline patient or cavity characteristics. Successful resolution was accomplished in 88% who underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy versus 45% who received standard drainage (P < .01), without a change in the total number of procedures. The maximum size of tract dilation was larger in the direct endoscopic necrosectomy group (17 mm vs 14 mm, P < .02). Complications were limited to mild periprocedural bleeding with equivalent rates between groups.
Retrospective, referral bias, single center.
Direct endoscopic necrosectomy achieves higher rates of resolution, without a concomitant change in the number of endoscopic procedures, complication rate, or time to resolution compared with standard endoscopic drainage for WOPN. The need for fewer postprocedural inpatient hospital days and a decrease in the rate of cavity recurrence are also likely benefits of this technique.
描述了通过直接腔内清创术对包裹性胰腺坏死(WOPN)进行内镜治疗。
比较直接内镜坏死组织切除术与传统经壁内镜引流术治疗WOPN的效果。
回顾性比较研究。
学术性三级医疗中心。
自1998年4月起转诊至明尼苏达州罗切斯特市梅奥诊所进行WOPN内镜引流的患者。
每位患者均接受标准内镜引流,包括经壁腔穿刺、瘘管扩张以及置入大口径支架。如果在任何一次手术过程中进行了辅助直接内镜坏死组织切除术,则将患者分类为直接内镜坏死组织切除术组;其他所有患者则归入标准引流组。
成功定义为坏死腔消失,无需手术或经皮介入。
确定了45例符合研究标准的患者:25例行直接内镜坏死组织切除术,20例行标准内镜引流。患者或坏死腔的基线特征无差异。直接内镜坏死组织切除术组88%的患者成功治愈,而标准引流组为45%(P <.01),手术总次数无变化。直接内镜坏死组织切除术组的瘘管扩张最大尺寸更大(17毫米对14毫米,P <.02)。并发症仅限于轻微的术中出血,两组发生率相当。
回顾性研究、转诊偏倚、单中心。
与WOPN的标准内镜引流相比,直接内镜坏死组织切除术的治愈率更高,同时内镜手术次数、并发症发生率或治愈时间均无变化。该技术还可能减少术后住院天数,并降低坏死腔复发率。