Kong Yalin, Zhang Hongyi, He Xiaojun, Liu Chengli, Piao Longsong, Zhao Gang, Zhen Yuying
Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Chinese PLA Air Force General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Injury. 2014 Jan;45(1):134-40. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.07.017. Epub 2013 Aug 13.
The actual benefit of endoscopic techniques in the non-operative management (NOM) of pancreatic injury is still unclear, with its role and effectiveness in the NOM of pancreatic injury remains defined and doubted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and long-term results of endoscopic techniques in the NOM of blunt pancreatic injury, and to determine whether NOM can be performed safely for selective patients with pancreatic injury.
The records and follow-up data of all patients with blunt pancreatic injuries over 16-year period from October 1, 1996, to September 30, 2012 at our department were retrospectively reviewed. Failure of NOM (FNOM) occurred if laparotomy was required after attempted NOM.
132 patients (32% of all patients with blunt pancreatic injury) underwent NOM, including 58 who underwent endoscopic management (EM) and 74 who were observed without EM (NO-EM). FNOM of overall NOM was 20%, including 30% of NO-EM and 9% of EM. There was no significant difference in FNOM for NO-EM versus EM for grade I, however, a significant decrease in FNOM was noted with the addition of EM for grade II and III. EM was a statistically significant independent risk factor. Regular follow-up of 1 year showed that, for patients from grade I to III, 53 patients (42%) from operative management (OM) and 34 patients (46%) of the NO-EM developed various pancreatic-related complications, while only 15 patients (26%) of the EM developed such complications, and the difference was significant.
Application of strictly defined selection criteria for NOM and EM in patients with blunt pancreatic injury resulted in one of the lowest FNOM rates (9%) and pancreatic-related complications incidence (25%). Selective application of EM for hemodynamically stable patients with blunt pancreatic injury will extend the indications for, and improve success of NOM.
内镜技术在胰腺损伤非手术治疗(NOM)中的实际益处仍不明确,其在胰腺损伤NOM中的作用和有效性仍有待明确且受到质疑。本研究的目的是评估内镜技术在钝性胰腺损伤NOM中的可行性和长期结果,并确定对于部分胰腺损伤患者,NOM是否可以安全实施。
回顾性分析1996年10月1日至2012年9月30日期间我科收治的所有钝性胰腺损伤患者的病历及随访数据。若在尝试NOM后需要剖腹手术,则视为NOM失败(FNOM)。
132例患者(占所有钝性胰腺损伤患者的32%)接受了NOM,其中58例接受了内镜治疗(EM),74例未接受EM(NO-EM)而仅接受观察。总体NOM的FNOM为20%,其中NO-EM组为30%,EM组为9%。对于I级损伤,NO-EM组与EM组的FNOM无显著差异,然而,对于II级和III级损伤,增加EM后FNOM显著降低。EM是一个具有统计学意义的独立危险因素。1年的定期随访显示,对于I至III级患者,手术治疗(OM)组的53例患者(42%)和NO-EM组的34例患者(46%)出现了各种胰腺相关并发症,而EM组仅15例患者(26%)出现此类并发症,差异显著。
对钝性胰腺损伤患者严格定义NOM和EM的选择标准,可使FNOM率(9%)和胰腺相关并发症发生率(25%)处于最低水平之一。对血流动力学稳定的钝性胰腺损伤患者选择性应用EM将扩大NOM的适应证并提高其成功率。