Suppr超能文献

良性胆管狭窄。手术还是内镜检查?

Benign biliary strictures. Surgery or endoscopy?

作者信息

Davids P H, Tanka A K, Rauws E A, van Gulik T M, van Leeuwen D J, de Wit L T, Verbeek P C, Huibregtse K, van der Heyde M N, Tytgat G N

机构信息

Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary Unit, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Ann Surg. 1993 Mar;217(3):237-43. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199303000-00004.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the results of surgery and endoscopy for benign biliary strictures in one institution, over the same period of time and with the same outcome definitions.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Surgery is considered the treatment of choice, offering more than 80% long-term success. Endoscopic stenting has been reported to yield similar results and might be a useful alternative.

METHODS

In this nonrandomized retrospective study, 101 patients with benign biliary strictures were included. Thirty-five patients were treated surgically and 66 by endoscopic stenting. Patient characteristics, initial trauma, previous repairs, and level of obstruction were comparable in both groups. Surgical therapy consisted of constructing a biliary-digestive anastomosis in normal ductal tissue. Endoscopic therapy consisted of placement of endoprostheses, with trimonthly elective exchange for a 1-year period.

RESULTS

Mean length of follow-up was 50 +/- 3.8 and 42 +/- 4.2 months for surgery and endoscopy, respectively. Early complications occurred more frequently in the surgically treated group (p < 0.03). Late complications during therapy, occurred only in the endoscopically treated group. In 46 patients, the endoprostheses were eventually removed. Recurrent stricturing occurred in 17% in both surgical and endoscopic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery and endoscopy for benign biliary strictures have similar long-term success rates. Indications for surgery are complete transections, failed previous repairs, and failures of endoscopic therapy. All other patients are candidates for endoscopic stenting as the initial treatment.

摘要

目的

本研究在同一机构、同一时间段内,采用相同的结局定义,比较手术和内镜治疗良性胆管狭窄的结果。

总结背景数据

手术被认为是首选治疗方法,长期成功率超过80%。据报道,内镜支架置入术也能取得类似结果,可能是一种有用的替代方法。

方法

在这项非随机回顾性研究中,纳入了101例良性胆管狭窄患者。35例接受手术治疗,66例接受内镜支架置入术治疗。两组患者的特征、初始创伤、既往修复情况和梗阻部位相当。手术治疗包括在正常胆管组织中构建胆肠吻合术。内镜治疗包括放置内支架,并在1年内每三个月定期更换。

结果

手术组和内镜组的平均随访时间分别为50±3.8个月和42±4.2个月。手术治疗组早期并发症发生率更高(p<0.03)。治疗期间的晚期并发症仅发生在内镜治疗组。46例患者最终取出了内支架。手术组和内镜组的复发狭窄发生率均为17%。

结论

手术和内镜治疗良性胆管狭窄的长期成功率相似。手术适应证为完全横断、既往修复失败和内镜治疗失败。所有其他患者均适合以内镜支架置入术作为初始治疗。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0f4d/1242775/0aa9b95655b3/annsurg00073-0052-a.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验