Suppr超能文献

改良穿刺器法与拉提法行经皮内镜胃造口术的比较:前瞻性随机研究。

Comparison of modified introducer method with pull method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: prospective randomized study.

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Toho University Ohashi Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Dig Endosc. 2012 Nov;24(6):426-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2012.01317.x. Epub 2012 Apr 26.

Abstract

AIM

The pull method is associated with a high incidence of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) site infection. The introducer method has been shown to be less likely to cause infection, because it avoids the passage of a tube through the oropharynx. The aim of the present study was to compare the modified introducer method with the pull method for PEG.

METHODS

The study included patients who were scheduled for PEG from April 2008 to April 2010. The patients were randomly assigned to receive PEG by the pull method (Group I) or the modified introducer method (Group II). We evaluated the incidence of PEG site infection, some infection-associated parameters and other complications. Wound infections were evaluated in accordance with the Jain's score.

RESULTS

Of 62 patients enrolled, 31 patients were assigned to each of the two groups. One patient in Group I died on the day after PEG. The cause of death and relationship with PEG were unclear. Excluding this patient, 61 were included in the per-protocol analysis. The incidence of peristomal infection within 1 week was slightly lower in Group II than in Group I, albeit not statistically significant (12.9% vs 23.3%, P = 0.3354). White blood cell count (WBC) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were significantly lower in Group II (WBC: P = 0.0345, CRP: P = 0.0346). None of the patients underwent surgical procedures for the treatment of peristomal infection.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study show that gastrostomy by the modified introducer method may be less likely, although not significantly, to cause peristomal infection than the pull method.

摘要

目的

经皮内镜胃造口术(PEG)中,采用牵拉法与较高的 PEG 部位感染发生率相关。而导入器法则不易引起感染,因为它避免了将导管穿过口咽部。本研究旨在比较改良导入器法与牵拉法行 PEG。

方法

该研究纳入了 2008 年 4 月至 2010 年 4 月期间计划行 PEG 的患者。患者随机分配接受牵拉法(I 组)或改良导入器法(II 组)行 PEG。我们评估了 PEG 部位感染的发生率、一些感染相关参数和其他并发症。根据 Jain 评分评估伤口感染。

结果

62 例患者中,31 例患者被分配至两组。I 组中有 1 例患者在 PEG 术后当天死亡。死亡原因和与 PEG 的关系尚不清楚。排除该患者后,61 例患者纳入意向性治疗分析。II 组的 1 周内吻合口感染发生率略低于 I 组,但无统计学意义(12.9% vs 23.3%,P = 0.3354)。II 组的白细胞计数(WBC)和 C 反应蛋白(CRP)水平显著低于 I 组(WBC:P = 0.0345,CRP:P = 0.0346)。无一例患者因吻合口感染而行手术治疗。

结论

本研究结果表明,与牵拉法相比,改良导入器法行胃造口术可能不易引起吻合口感染,但差异无统计学意义。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验