Suppr超能文献

何时干预急性坏死性胰腺炎:干预策略的最佳时机的叙事性综述。

When to Intervene in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review of the Optimal Timing for Intervention Strategies.

机构信息

First Propaedeutic Surgery Department, University General Hospital of Thessaloniki AHEPA, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece.

Emergency Department, University General Hospital of Thessaloniki AHEPA, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece.

出版信息

Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Sep 27;60(10):1592. doi: 10.3390/medicina60101592.

Abstract

: Acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) is the acute inflammation of pancreatic parenchyma, most commonly due to alcohol abuse or cholelithiasis. The treatment can be either conservative or invasive, including a variety of techniques; however, it has not yet been established if the intervention should be early or if it should be delayed. The aim of this review is to investigate the optimal time for intervention in ANP. : A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus from inception until September 2024 for studies reporting the comparison between early and late intervention. : Early intervention, within 4 weeks of symptom onset, often involves drainage via percutaneous, endoscopic, or combined methods. Delayed intervention occurs after 4 weeks of symptom onset. This can be conducted either surgically or via minimally invasive means. The results of this review reveal that the time of intervention for ANP plays an important role in the prognosis and the course of the disease. In particular, early intervention is associated with higher mortality, which is also the primary clinical outcome. Delayed intervention is also superior regarding secondary clinical outcomes, specifically the complications associated with the intervention. Thus, it is accompanied by fewer episodes of new-onset organ failure, bleeding, gastrointestinal fistula, pancreatic fistula, wound infection, endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and other complications. Finally, delayed intervention results in shorter stays, both in hospitals and the ICU. : Delayed intervention is clearly more effective than early intervention and should be preferred. However, early intervention appears to be both safe and effective, and it is feasible.

摘要

急性坏死性胰腺炎(ANP)是胰腺实质的急性炎症,最常见的原因是酗酒或胆石症。治疗方法可以是保守的也可以是侵入性的,包括各种技术;然而,尚未确定干预应该是早期的还是应该延迟的。本综述的目的是探讨 ANP 干预的最佳时机。

在 PubMed 和 Scopus 中进行了文献检索,检索时间从开始到 2024 年 9 月,以查找报告早期和晚期干预比较的研究。

早期干预是指在症状出现后 4 周内进行,通常通过经皮、内镜或联合方法进行引流。延迟干预是在症状出现后 4 周后进行。这可以通过手术或微创方式进行。本综述的结果表明,ANP 的干预时间对预后和疾病过程起着重要作用。特别是,早期干预与更高的死亡率相关,这也是主要的临床结局。延迟干预在继发性临床结局方面也更具优势,特别是与干预相关的并发症。因此,它与新发器官衰竭、出血、胃肠瘘、胰瘘、伤口感染、内分泌胰腺功能不全和其他并发症的发作次数减少有关。最后,延迟干预导致住院时间和 ICU 住院时间都缩短。

延迟干预显然比早期干预更有效,应优先选择。然而,早期干预似乎既安全又有效,并且是可行的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fe8c/11509130/ac6bdd05c429/medicina-60-01592-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验