Suppr超能文献

超声引导与透视引导下经皮经肝胆道引流的比较

Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopically Guided Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage.

作者信息

Nennstiel Simon, Treiber Matthias, Faber Alexander, Haller Bernhard, von Delius Stefan, Schmid Roland M, Neu Bruno

机构信息

Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin II, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, Munich, Germany.

Institut für Medizinische Statistik und Epidemiologie, Klinikum Rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Dig Dis. 2019;37(1):77-86. doi: 10.1159/000493120. Epub 2018 Sep 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) plays a significant role especially in the palliation of an endoscopically inaccessible biliary system. Since a standard technique of PTBD is not defined, we compared a fluoroscopically guided technique (F-PTBD) with an ultrasound (US-PTBD) guided approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Procedure characteristics, success-rates and complication-rates of the different PTBD techniques were compared in patients who underwent PTBD between October 1, 2006, and -December 31, 2014.

RESULTS

In 195 patients, 251 PTBDs (207 F-PTBDs, 44 US-PTBDs) were performed. F-PTBDs were mostly inserted from the right and US-PTBDs from the left. Patient age, gender and physical status were comparable in both techniques. There was no difference regarding overall procedure success (90%/86.4%), overall interventional complication rates (10.6%/9.1%), fluoroscopy times, intervention times or sedatives dosages. However, major complications were only encountered in F-PTBDs. There was a higher success rate for F-PTBD vs. US-PTBD from the right side (91.9 vs. 75%; p = 0.033) and a trend towards a higher success rate for US guidance from the left side (82.9 vs. 95.8%; p = 0.223).

CONCLUSIONS

For drainage of the right biliary system F-PTBD seems superior over the US-PTBD technique used in this study. However, major complications can occur more frequently in F-PTBD.

摘要

背景

经皮经肝胆道引流术(PTBD)发挥着重要作用,尤其是在缓解内镜无法到达的胆道系统梗阻方面。由于PTBD的标准技术尚未明确,我们比较了荧光透视引导技术(F-PTBD)和超声引导技术(US-PTBD)。

患者与方法

对2006年10月1日至2014年12月31日期间接受PTBD的患者,比较不同PTBD技术的操作特点、成功率及并发症发生率。

结果

195例患者共进行了251次PTBD(207次F-PTBD,44次US-PTBD)。F-PTBD大多从右侧插入,US-PTBD大多从左侧插入。两种技术在患者年龄、性别和身体状况方面具有可比性。在总体操作成功率(90%/86.4%)、总体介入并发症发生率(10.6%/9.1%)、透视时间、介入时间或镇静剂用量方面无差异。然而,主要并发症仅出现在F-PTBD组。右侧F-PTBD的成功率高于US-PTBD(91.9%对75%;p = 0.033),左侧US引导有成功率更高的趋势(82.9%对95.8%;p = 0.223)。

结论

对于右侧胆道系统的引流,F-PTBD似乎优于本研究中使用的US-PTBD技术。然而,F-PTBD可能更频繁地发生主要并发症。

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