Suppr超能文献

离子型、单体、高渗性造影剂与非离子型、二聚体、等渗性造影剂在经内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)中的比较。

Comparison of ionic, monomer, high osmolar contrast media with non-ionic, dimer, iso-osmolar contrast media in ERCP.

作者信息

Ogawa Masami, Kawaguchi Yoshiaki, Kawashima Yohei, Mizukami Hajime, Maruno Atsuko, Ito Hiroyuki, Mine Tetsuya

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa 259-1193, Japan.

出版信息

Tokai J Exp Clin Med. 2013 Sep 20;38(3):109-13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Pancreatitis is the most common and serious complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Several studies have compared contrast media (CM) with different osmolalities, but the results are conflicting. We conducted this study to clarify the difference between 2 CM used in ERCP.

METHODS

Five hundred and seventy-six patients were examined by using ERCP in our hospital during 2010. Out of these, 56 patients were enrolled in this study. We investigated the incidence of post ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and hyperamylasemia. Serum amylase levels were compared in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were treated with iodixanol and 29 with diatrizoate meglumine Na. The rate of PEP in the diatrizoate meglumine Na group and iodixanol group was 0% (0/29) and 7.4% (2/27), respectively (P = 0.228). The rate of hyperamylasemia was 10.3% (3/29) and 14.8% (4/27), respectively (P = 0.70). There were no significant differences between two groups for amylase levels pre-procedure (P = 0.082), 3 h post procedure (P = 0.744), or next morning (P = 0.265).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the rates of PEP or hyperamylasemia between CMs in ERCP. We believe it is unnecessary to use the more expensive low osmolality CM in ERCP to prevent PEP.

摘要

目的

胰腺炎是内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)最常见且最严重的并发症。多项研究比较了不同渗透压的造影剂(CM),但结果相互矛盾。我们开展本研究以明确ERCP中使用的两种CM之间的差异。

方法

2010年我院对576例患者进行了ERCP检查。其中,56例患者纳入本研究。我们调查了ERCP术后胰腺炎(PEP)和高淀粉酶血症的发生率。比较了两组的血清淀粉酶水平。

结果

27例患者接受了碘克沙醇治疗,29例接受了泛影葡胺钠治疗。泛影葡胺钠组和碘克沙醇组的PEP发生率分别为0%(0/29)和7.4%(2/27)(P = 0.228)。高淀粉酶血症发生率分别为10.3%(3/29)和14.8%(4/27)(P = 0.70)。两组术前(P = 0.082)、术后3小时(P = 0.744)或次日早晨(P = 0.265)的淀粉酶水平无显著差异。

结论

ERCP中不同CM的PEP和高淀粉酶血症发生率无显著差异。我们认为在ERCP中使用更昂贵的低渗CM来预防PEP没有必要。

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