Siiki Antti, Vaalavuo Yrjö, Antila Anne, Ukkonen Mika, Rinta-Kiikka Irina, Sand Juhani, Laukkarinen Johanna
a Department of Gastroenterology and Alimentary Tract Surgery , Tampere University Hospital , Tampere , Finland.
b Department of Clinical Radiology , Tampere University Hospital , Tampere , Finland.
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2018 Oct-Nov;53(10-11):1376-1380. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2018.1518480. Epub 2018 Nov 5.
The treatment of post-cholecystectomy bile leak is endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) with plastic stent (PS) insertion combined with external drainage. Self-expanding biodegradable biliary stents (BDBS) have only recently become available.
The aim was to compare success rate, adverse events and costs of BDBS with PS in the treatment of post-cholecystectomy cystic duct leak Materials and methods: Patients recruited prospectively for treatment with BDBS during the period 2014-2017 were compared to a control group treated with PS in a non-randomized setting.
Altogether 32 patients (median age 68, range 33-88, 59% male) were treated for Strasberg A bile leak over a period of 3.5 years, accounting for 1.8% of all ERCs. Eight patients were treated with BDBS and 24 with PS. Treatment with BDBS was safe; rate of readmissions and 30-day adverse events were 13% in both groups. There was no statistical difference in the clinical success rate. All cases with laparoscopic lavation or re-ERC with stent exchange occurred in the PS group. Total drain output was lower in BDBS patients (330ml vs 83ml, p=.002). All PS patients required another endoscopy for stent removal, whereas all BDBS patients were spared repeated endoscopy.
Treatment of cystic duct leak with BDBS is highly successful and as safe as traditional treatment with PS. The most obvious benefit of BDBS is that it avoids stent removal. The lower drain output after ERC with a trend for fewer unplanned interventions may indicate more efficient leak resolution with the large bore BDBS.
胆囊切除术后胆漏的治疗方法是内镜逆行胆管造影(ERC)并置入塑料支架(PS),同时结合外部引流。自膨式可生物降解胆管支架(BDBS)最近才开始应用。
比较BDBS和PS治疗胆囊切除术后胆囊管漏的成功率、不良事件和成本。材料与方法:将2014年至2017年期间前瞻性招募接受BDBS治疗的患者与在非随机环境下接受PS治疗的对照组进行比较。
在3.5年的时间里,共有32例患者(中位年龄68岁,范围33 - 88岁,59%为男性)因Strasberg A型胆漏接受治疗,占所有ERC病例的1.8%。8例患者接受BDBS治疗,24例接受PS治疗。BDBS治疗安全;两组的再入院率和30天不良事件发生率均为13%。临床成功率无统计学差异。所有腹腔镜灌洗或带支架更换的再次ERC病例均发生在PS组。BDBS患者的总引流量较低(330ml对83ml,p = 0.002)。所有PS患者都需要再次进行内镜检查以取出支架,而所有BDBS患者都无需重复内镜检查。
BDBS治疗胆囊管漏非常成功,与传统的PS治疗一样安全。BDBS最明显的优点是避免了支架取出。ERC后引流量较低且计划外干预较少的趋势可能表明大口径BDBS能更有效地解决胆漏问题。