Suppr超能文献

内镜经鼻胆囊管或支架置入术治疗急性胆囊炎:日本的一项初步前瞻性随机试验(附视频)。

Endoscopic nasogallbladder tube or stent placement in acute cholecystitis: a preliminary prospective randomized trial in Japan (with videos).

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan.

出版信息

Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Jan;81(1):111-8. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.046.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are currently no prospective, controlled trials of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the technical success rate and efficacy of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage by using either endoscopic nasogallbladder drainage (ENGBD) or endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) for patients with acute cholecystitis.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care referral centers.

PATIENTS

Seventy-three consecutive patients with acute cholecystitis were randomized.

INTERVENTIONS

ENGBD by using a 5F or 7F tube (n = 37) or EGBS (n = 36) by using a 7F stent.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASUREMENTS

Technical success, clinical success, adverse events, and procedure-related pain score.

RESULTS

The overall technical success rates in the ENGBD and EGBS groups were 91.9% and 86.1%, respectively (P > .05). The mean procedure times of ENGBD and EGBS were 20.3 ± 12.1 and 22.2 ± 14.5 minutes, respectively (P > .05). The overall clinical success rates by per protocol analysis were 94.1% and 90.3% in the ENGBD and EGBS groups, respectively, whereas the rates by intention-to-treat analysis were 86.5% and 77.8%, respectively (P > .05). Moderate adverse events were observed in the ENGBD (n = 2) and EGBS (n = 1) groups. The mean visual analog score of postprocedure pain in the ENGBD group was significantly higher than that in the EGBS group (1.3 ± 1.1 vs 0.4 ± 0.8, respectively; P < .001).

LIMITATIONS

Small sample size and the participation of multiple endoscopists who may have different levels of experience in endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

Both ENGBD and EGBS appear to be suitable for the treatment of acute cholecystitis in patients who are poor candidates for emergency cholecystectomy. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000012316.).

摘要

背景

目前尚无急性胆囊炎内镜经乳头胆囊引流的前瞻性、对照试验。

目的

我们通过内镜鼻胆管引流(ENGBD)或内镜胆囊支架置入术(EGBS)评估急性胆囊炎患者内镜经乳头胆囊引流的技术成功率和疗效。

设计

随机对照研究。

设置

三级转诊中心。

患者

73 例连续急性胆囊炎患者随机分组。

干预措施

使用 5F 或 7F 管进行 ENGBD(n = 37)或使用 7F 支架进行 EGBS(n = 36)。

主要结局和测量

技术成功率、临床成功率、不良事件和与操作相关的疼痛评分。

结果

ENGBD 和 EGBS 组的总体技术成功率分别为 91.9%和 86.1%(P >.05)。ENGBD 和 EGBS 的平均手术时间分别为 20.3 ± 12.1 分钟和 22.2 ± 14.5 分钟(P >.05)。根据意向治疗分析,ENGBD 和 EGBS 组的总体临床成功率分别为 94.1%和 90.3%,而按方案分析的成功率分别为 86.5%和 77.8%(P >.05)。ENGBD(n = 2)和 EGBS(n = 1)组均观察到中度不良事件。ENGBD 组术后疼痛视觉模拟评分明显高于 EGBS 组(1.3 ± 1.1 与 0.4 ± 0.8,P <.001)。

局限性

样本量小,参与的内镜医师可能在经乳头胆囊引流方面经验水平不同。

结论

ENGBD 和 EGBS 似乎均适用于不适合急诊胆囊切除术的急性胆囊炎患者的治疗。(临床试验注册号:UMIN000012316)。

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