Department of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Dig Dis Sci. 2020 Dec;65(12):3696-3701. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06116-6. Epub 2020 Feb 5.
Percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) performed pro-actively for collections in acute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with better outcomes. However, there are only a few studies describing this protocol.
We aimed to evaluate an aggressive PCD protocol.
Consecutive patients with AP who underwent PCD with an aggressive protocol between January 2018 and January 2019 were included. This protocol involved catheter upsizing at a pre-specified interval (every 4-6 days) as well as drainage of all the new collections. The indications and technical details of PCD and clinical outcomes were compared with patients who underwent standard PCD.
Out of the 185 patients with AP evaluated during the study period, 110 (59.4%) underwent PCD, all with the aggressive protocol. The historical cohort of standard PCD comprised of 113 patients. There was no significant difference in the indication of PCD and interval from pain onset to PCD between the two groups. The mean number of catheters was significantly higher in the aggressive PCD group (1.86 ± 0.962 vs. 1.44 ± 0.667, p = 0.002). Additional catheters were inserted in 54.2% of patients in aggressive group vs. 36.2% in the standard group (p = 0.006). Length of hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay were significantly longer in the standard PCD group (34.3 ± 20.14 vs. 27.45 ± 14.2 days, p < 0.001 and 10.46 ± 12.29 vs. 4.12 ± 8.5, p = 0.009, respectively). There was no significant difference in mortality and surgery between the two groups.
Aggressive PCD protocol results in reduced length of hospital stay and ICU stay and can reduce hospitalization costs.
在急性胰腺炎(AP)中积极进行经皮导管引流(PCD)可改善预后。然而,仅有少数研究描述了这一方案。
我们旨在评估一种积极的 PCD 方案。
纳入 2018 年 1 月至 2019 年 1 月期间接受积极 PCD 方案治疗的 AP 患者。该方案包括每隔 4-6 天更换更大尺寸的导管,并引流所有新的积液。比较了 PCD 的适应证、技术细节和临床结局与接受标准 PCD 的患者。
在研究期间,185 例 AP 患者中,110 例(59.4%)接受了 PCD,均采用积极的方案。标准 PCD 的历史队列包括 113 例患者。两组患者的 PCD 适应证和从疼痛发作到 PCD 的时间间隔无显著差异。积极 PCD 组的平均导管数量明显更多(1.86±0.962 与 1.44±0.667,p=0.002)。积极组有 54.2%的患者需要插入额外的导管,而标准组为 36.2%(p=0.006)。标准 PCD 组的住院时间和 ICU 住院时间明显更长(34.3±20.14 与 27.45±14.2 天,p<0.001 和 10.46±12.29 与 4.12±8.5 天,p=0.009)。两组的死亡率和手术率无显著差异。
积极的 PCD 方案可缩短住院时间和 ICU 住院时间,降低住院费用。