Ishii Ken, Fujita Yuji, Suzuki Eisuke, Koyama Yuji, Tsujino Seitaro, Nagao Atsuki, Hosono Kunihiro, Teratani Takuma, Kubota Kensuke, Nakajima Atsushi
Department of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, NTT Tokyo Medical Center, 5-9-22 Higashi-Gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo 141-8625, Japan.
Department of Surgery, NTT Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo 141-8625, Japan.
J Clin Med. 2023 Apr 8;12(8):2778. doi: 10.3390/jcm12082778.
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage and percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage as a bridge to surgery in patients with acute cholecystitis unfit for urgent cholecystectomy.
This retrospective study included 46 patients who underwent cholecystectomy following endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) or percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) for acute cholecystitis in NTT Tokyo Medical Center. We surveyed 35 patients as the EUS-GBD group and 11 patients as the PTGBD group, and compared the rate of technical success of the cholecystectomy and periprocedural adverse events. A 7-F, 10-cm double pigtail plastic stent was used for ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage.
The rate of technical success of cholecystectomy was 100% in both groups. Regarding postsurgical adverse events, no significant difference was noted between the two groups (EUS-GBD group, 11.4%, vs. PTGBD group, 9.0%; 0.472).
EUS-GBD as a BTS seems to be an alternative for patients with AC because it can ensure lower adverse events. On the other hand, there are two major limitations in this study--the sample size is small and there is a risk of selection bias.
本研究旨在比较内镜超声引导下胆囊引流术(EUS-GBD)与经皮经肝胆囊引流术(PTGBD)作为不适合紧急胆囊切除术的急性胆囊炎患者手术桥梁的有效性和安全性。
这项回顾性研究纳入了46例在NTT东京医疗中心因急性胆囊炎接受内镜超声引导下胆囊引流术(EUS-GBD)或经皮经肝胆囊引流术(PTGBD)后行胆囊切除术的患者。我们将35例患者作为EUS-GBD组,11例患者作为PTGBD组,并比较了胆囊切除术的技术成功率和围手术期不良事件。使用7F、10cm双猪尾塑料支架进行超声引导下胆囊引流。
两组胆囊切除术的技术成功率均为100%。关于术后不良事件,两组之间未观察到显著差异(EUS-GBD组为11.4%,PTGBD组为9.0%;P = 0.472)。
EUS-GBD作为一种手术桥梁似乎是急性胆囊炎患者的一种替代方法,因为它可以确保较低的不良事件发生率。另一方面,本研究存在两个主要局限性——样本量小和存在选择偏倚的风险。