Department of Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Department of Surgical Disciplines, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Surg Endosc. 2020 Mar;34(3):1157-1166. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06866-z. Epub 2019 May 28.
Pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) may develop following acute pancreatitis (AP). Endoscopic and laparoscopic internal drainage are accepted modalities for drainage of PFCs but have not been compared in a randomized trial. Our objective was to compare endoscopic and laparoscopic internal drainage of pseudocyst/walled-off necrosis following AP.
Patients with symptomatic pseudocysts or walled-off necrosis suitable for laparoscopic and endoscopic transmural internal drainage were randomized to either modality in a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopic drainage comprised of per-oral transluminal cystogastrostomy. Additionally, endoscopic lavage and necrosectomy were done following a step-up approach for infected collections. Surgical laparoscopic cystogastrostomy was done for drainage, lavage, and necrosectomy. Primary outcome was resolution of PFCs by the intended modality and secondary outcome was complications.
Sixty patients were randomized, 30 each to laparoscopic and endoscopic drainage. Both groups were comparable for baseline characteristics. The initial success rate was 83.3% in the laparoscopic and 76.6% in the endoscopic group (p = 0.7) after the index intervention. The overall success rate of 93.3% (28/30) and 90% (27/30) in the laparoscopic and endoscopic groups respectively was also similar (p = 1.0). Two patients in the laparoscopic group required endoscopic cystogastrostomy for persistent collections. Similarly, two patients in the endoscopic group required laparoscopic drainage. Postoperative complications were comparable between the groups except for higher post-procedure infection in the endoscopic group (19 vs. 9; p = 0.01) requiring endoscopic re-intervention.
Endoscopic and laparoscopic techniques have similar efficacy for internal drainage of suitable pancreatic fluid collections with < 30% debris. The choice of procedure should depend on available expertise and patient preference.
急性胰腺炎(AP)后可能会形成胰液积聚(PFC)。内镜和腹腔镜下内引流术是引流 PFC 的公认方法,但尚未在随机试验中进行比较。我们的目的是比较内镜和腹腔镜下治疗 AP 后假性囊肿/包裹性坏死(WON)的内引流效果。
适合内镜和腹腔镜经壁内引流的有症状假性囊肿或 WON 患者被随机分配到这两种治疗方式的随机对照试验中。内镜引流包括经口内镜下胃空肠造口术。此外,对于感染性积聚,采用逐步递进的方法进行内镜冲洗和坏死组织清除。手术腹腔镜下胃空肠造口术用于引流、冲洗和坏死组织清除。主要结局是采用预期的方式使 PFC 得到解决,次要结局是并发症。
共有 60 例患者被随机分组,每组 30 例分别接受腹腔镜和内镜引流。两组在基线特征方面具有可比性。初始成功率分别为腹腔镜组 83.3%和内镜组 76.6%(p=0.7)。腹腔镜组和内镜组的总成功率分别为 93.3%(28/30)和 90%(27/30),也相似(p=1.0)。腹腔镜组有 2 例患者因持续积聚需要内镜下胃空肠造口术,而内镜组也有 2 例患者需要腹腔镜引流。两组术后并发症无显著差异,但内镜组术后感染率较高(19%比 9%;p=0.01),需要内镜再次干预。
内镜和腹腔镜技术对于<30%碎屑的合适胰液积聚的内引流具有相似的疗效。手术方式的选择应取决于现有专业知识和患者偏好。