Suppr超能文献

内镜下套扎术联合氩离子凝固术与硬化套扎术治疗食管静脉曲张的疗效比较

Endoscopic band ligation plus argon plasma coagulation versus scleroligation for eradication of esophageal varices.

作者信息

Harras Fouad, Sheta El Shazly, Shehata Mona, El Saadany Sherif, Selim Mahmoud, Mansour Loai

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.

出版信息

J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Jun;25(6):1058-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2010.06265.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate endoscopic band ligation plus argon plasma coagulation versus scleroligation.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to: Group I, 50 patients subjected to endoscopic injection sclerotherapy; Group II, 50 patients subjected to variceal band ligation; Group III, 50 patients subjected to combined endoscopic sclerotherapy and band ligation; and Group IV, 50 patients subjected to endoscopic band ligation plus argon plasma coagulation.

RESULTS

A comparison of the number of therapeutic sessions showed that group III underwent significantly fewer sessions. As regards post-treatment complications, Group I showed a high incidence of transient pyrexia, transient dysphagia and/or retrosternal pain and ulceration, while in group II a higher incidence of rebleeding was demonstrated, as well as a higher incidence of esophageal varix recurrence after eradication during the follow-up period. A higher mortality incidence was detected in groups I and II. The follow-up incidence did not significantly differ between the different study groups.

CONCLUSION

Scleroligation allows very rapid eradication of varices, has a low recurrence rate, avoids the disadvantage of high recurrence of band ligation alone, and does not require special skills over sclerotherapy or band ligation. Also, band ligation plus argon plasma coagulation allows for very rapid eradication of varices, and a low recurrence rate, with no obvious recorded complications, but it has the disadvantage of being the most expensive technique and requires special equipment that is only available in a few endoscopic centers.

摘要

背景与目的

本研究旨在评估内镜下套扎术联合氩离子凝固术与硬化套扎术的效果。

方法

将患者随机分为四组:第一组,50例患者接受内镜下注射硬化治疗;第二组,50例患者接受静脉曲张套扎术;第三组,50例患者接受内镜下硬化治疗与套扎术联合治疗;第四组,50例患者接受内镜下套扎术联合氩离子凝固术。

结果

治疗疗程数比较显示,第三组接受的疗程数明显较少。关于治疗后并发症,第一组出现短暂发热、短暂吞咽困难和/或胸骨后疼痛及溃疡的发生率较高,而第二组显示再出血发生率较高,以及随访期间根除后食管静脉曲张复发率较高。第一组和第二组的死亡率较高。不同研究组之间的随访发生率无显著差异。

结论

硬化套扎术能非常迅速地根除静脉曲张,复发率低,避免了单纯套扎术高复发的缺点,且不需要比硬化治疗或套扎术更高的特殊技能。此外,套扎术联合氩离子凝固术能非常迅速地根除静脉曲张,复发率低,无明显记录的并发症,但它的缺点是费用最高,且需要仅在少数内镜中心才有的特殊设备。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验