Chen Yu-Jhou, Seak Chen-June, Cheng Hao-Tsai, Chen Chien-Cheng, Chen Tsung-Hsing, Sung Chang-Mu, Ng Chip-Jin, Kang Shih-Ching, Su Ming-Yao, Hsieh Sen-Yung
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, New Taipei Municipal TuCheng Hospital; No.6, Sec2, Jincheng Road, Tucheng Dist., New Taipei City 236, Taiwan.
J Pers Med. 2022 Jun 17;12(6):989. doi: 10.3390/jpm12060989.
Caustic ingestion has gained increasing attention worldwide. However, the insight into whether to use esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) or computed tomography (CT) for first-line investigation remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate a diagnostic and management algorithm that combines EGD and CT for rapid triage.
We established an algorithm for our hospital in 2013, aiming to maximize the benefits and minimize the limitations of EGD and CT. Then, we retrospectively analyzed the 163 enrolled patients treated between 2014 and 2019 and categorized them into 4 groups: A = 3 (1.8%): with perforation signs and directly confirmed by CT, B = 10 (6.1%): clinically suspected perforation but not initially proven by CT, C = 91 (55.8%): initial perforation less favored but with EGD grade ≥ 2b or GI/systemic complications, and D = 59 (36.2%): clinically stable with EGD grade ≤ 2a, according to initial signs/symptoms and EGD/CT grading. The morbidity and mortality of each group were analyzed. The predictive values of EGD and CT were examined by logistic regression analyses and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.
The outcomes of such algorithm were reported. CT was imperative for patients with toxic signs and suspected perforation. For non-emergent operations, additional EGD was safe and helpful in identifying surgical necessity. For patients with an initially low perforation risk, EGD alone sufficiently determined admission necessity. Among inpatients, EGD provided excellent discrimination for predicting the risk for signs/symptoms' deterioration. Routine additional CT was only beneficial for those with deteriorating signs/symptoms.
According to the analyses, initial signs/symptoms help to choose EGD or CT as the first-line investigative tool in caustic patients. CT is necessary for seriously injured patients, but it cannot replace EGD for moderate/mild injuries. The severity stratification and patient categorization help to simplify complex scenarios, accelerate decision-making, and prevent unnecessary intervention/therapy. External validation in a larger sample size is further indicated for this algorithm.
腐蚀性物质摄入在全球范围内受到越来越多的关注。然而,对于使用食管胃十二指肠镜检查(EGD)还是计算机断层扫描(CT)进行一线检查仍存在争议。本研究旨在评估一种结合EGD和CT进行快速分诊的诊断和管理算法。
我们于2013年为我院建立了一种算法,旨在最大限度地发挥EGD和CT的优势并最小化其局限性。然后,我们回顾性分析了2014年至2019年间接受治疗的163例登记患者,并将他们分为4组:A组 = 3例(1.8%):有穿孔迹象且经CT直接证实;B组 = 10例(6.1%):临床怀疑穿孔但最初未被CT证实;C组 = 91例(55.8%):最初穿孔可能性较小但EGD分级≥2b或有胃肠道/全身并发症;D组 = 59例(36.2%):临床稳定且EGD分级≤2a,根据初始体征/症状以及EGD/CT分级进行分组。分析了每组的发病率和死亡率。通过逻辑回归分析和受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线检验EGD和CT的预测价值。
报告了该算法的结果。对于有毒性体征和疑似穿孔的患者,CT是必不可少的。对于非急诊手术,额外进行EGD是安全的,且有助于确定手术必要性。对于最初穿孔风险较低的患者,仅EGD就足以确定入院必要性。在住院患者中,EGD在预测体征/症状恶化风险方面具有出色的鉴别能力。常规额外进行CT仅对体征/症状恶化的患者有益。
根据分析,初始体征/症状有助于选择EGD或CT作为腐蚀性物质摄入患者的一线检查工具。对于重伤患者,CT是必要的,但对于中/轻度损伤,它不能替代EGD。严重程度分层和患者分类有助于简化复杂情况、加速决策制定并防止不必要的干预/治疗。该算法还需要在更大样本量中进行外部验证。