Pruett T L, Simmons R L
University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Surg Clin North Am. 1988 Feb;68(1):89-105. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109(16)44434-8.
The definitive role of catheter drainage in the therapy of abscesses has not yet been totally elucidated. The resolution rate of intra-abdominal infection with catheter drainage is highly variable, depending on the inclusion criteria employed. Certain infections are very effectively treated (i.e., abscesses that are single, not communicating with abdominal viscera, noncancerous, and bacterial) with simple catheter drainage, whereas others (i.e., infected pancreatic tumor phlegmon) prove to be much more resistant to simple catheter drainage. When all intra-abdominal "abscesses" are collected, the success of catheter drainage ranges from 47 per cent to 73 per cent. The wide variation should be seen not so much as a reflection of differences in technical ability of the radiologist to introduce a catheter, but rather as emblematic of the highly variable nature of the cause of intra-abdominal infection and the definition of an abscess. Hospitals with a large number of complex problems such as malignancy, transplant and other immunosuppressed patients, and referrals of patients with complex long-standing intra-abdominal infections are likely to have a much lower rate of success with percutaneously placed catheters than are those institutions that derive their series from post-traumatic or primary diseases such as appendiceal or diverticular disease. In the former series, a higher morbidity and mortality rate would be expected from any form of treatment when compared to a series from a practice based on more primary care problems. Intra-abdominal infections are a heterogeneous set of processes, and the role of interventional radiology in the diagnostic and therapeutic approach cannot be underestimated. In planning for the care of a patient with a presumed intra-abdominal infectious process, percutaneous aspiration of a fluid mass is an effective tool for establishing the diagnosis of an abscess. The brief introduction of a catheter has rarely led to contamination of an otherwise sterile collection. However, it often effects dramatic symptomatic relief if the fluid collection is infected. It has therefore been an evolving recommendation to employ the techniques of interventional radiology aggressively in a diagnostic capacity. Subsequently, therapeutic interventions can be undertaken in joint agreement among the physician, surgeon, and radiologist. The diagnosis and treatment of intra-abdominal infections can often times be carried out in a relatively easy and non-morbid manner that effects cure in a significant percentage of patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
导管引流在脓肿治疗中的明确作用尚未完全阐明。导管引流治疗腹腔内感染的治愈率差异很大,这取决于所采用的纳入标准。某些感染(即单发、不与腹腔脏器相通、非癌性且为细菌性的脓肿)采用单纯导管引流治疗非常有效,而其他一些感染(如感染性胰腺肿瘤蜂窝织炎)则对单纯导管引流具有更强的抵抗力。当收集所有腹腔内“脓肿”病例时,导管引流的成功率在47%至73%之间。这种广泛的差异不应过多地被视为放射科医生插入导管技术能力差异的反映,而应更多地被视为腹腔内感染病因的高度变异性以及脓肿定义的象征。与那些主要处理创伤后或原发性疾病(如阑尾炎或憩室病)的机构相比,拥有大量复杂问题(如恶性肿瘤、移植及其他免疫抑制患者,以及转诊来的患有复杂长期腹腔内感染的患者)的医院,经皮放置导管的成功率可能要低得多。在前一类病例系列中,与基于更多初级保健问题的实践系列相比,任何形式的治疗都可能预期有更高的发病率和死亡率。腹腔内感染是一组异质性疾病,介入放射学在诊断和治疗方法中的作用不可低估。在规划对疑似腹腔内感染过程患者的治疗时,经皮抽吸液体团块是确立脓肿诊断的有效工具。短暂插入导管很少会导致原本无菌的积液受到污染。然而,如果积液被感染,它通常能显著缓解症状。因此,越来越多的建议是积极运用介入放射学技术进行诊断。随后,可在医生、外科医生和放射科医生共同协商后进行治疗干预。腹腔内感染的诊断和治疗通常可以以相对简便且无严重并发症的方式进行,从而使相当比例的患者得以治愈。(摘要截断于400字)