内镜引流后经皮导管引流的时机对急性坏死性胰腺炎疗效的影响

Harsimran Bhatia, Sanya Vermani, Pankaj Gupta, Shameema Farook, Abhishek Kumar, Joseph Johnson, J. Shah, A. Singh, V. Jearth, J. Samanta, H. Mandavdhare, Vishal Sharma, S. Sinha, U. Dutta, Rakesh Kocchar
{"title":"内镜引流后经皮导管引流的时机对急性坏死性胰腺炎疗效的影响","authors":"Harsimran Bhatia, Sanya Vermani, Pankaj Gupta, Shameema Farook, Abhishek Kumar, Joseph Johnson, J. Shah, A. Singh, V. Jearth, J. Samanta, H. Mandavdhare, Vishal Sharma, S. Sinha, U. Dutta, Rakesh Kocchar","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1779303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background The role of dual-modality drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) is established. However, there are no data on the association of clinical outcomes with the timing of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD). We investigated the impact of the timing of PCD following endoscopic drainage of WON on clinical outcomes in AP.\n Materials and Methods This retrospective study comprised consecutive patients with necrotizing AP who underwent endoscopic cystogastrostomy (CG) of WON followed by PCD between September 2018 and March 2023. Based on endoscopic CG to PCD interval, patients were divided into groups (≤ and >3 days, ≤ and >1 week, ≤ and >10 days, and ≤ and >2 weeks). Baseline characteristics and indications of CG and PCD were recorded. Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups, including length of hospitalization, length of intensive care unit stay, need for surgical necrosectomy, and death during hospitalization.\n Results Thirty patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 35.5 ± 12.7 years) were evaluated. The mean CG to PCD interval was 11.2 ± 7.5 days. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics and indications of CG and PCD between the groups. The mean pain to CG interval was not significantly different between the groups. Endoscopic necrosectomy was performed in a significantly greater proportion of patients undergoing CG after 10 days (p = 0.003) and after 2 weeks (p = 0.032). There were no significant differences in the complications and clinical outcomes between the groups.\n Conclusion The timing of PCD following endoscopic CG does not affect clinical outcomes.","PeriodicalId":506648,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of the Timing of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage Following Endoscopic Drainage on Outcomes in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis\",\"authors\":\"Harsimran Bhatia, Sanya Vermani, Pankaj Gupta, Shameema Farook, Abhishek Kumar, Joseph Johnson, J. Shah, A. Singh, V. Jearth, J. Samanta, H. Mandavdhare, Vishal Sharma, S. Sinha, U. Dutta, Rakesh Kocchar\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1779303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Background The role of dual-modality drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) is established. However, there are no data on the association of clinical outcomes with the timing of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD). We investigated the impact of the timing of PCD following endoscopic drainage of WON on clinical outcomes in AP.\\n Materials and Methods This retrospective study comprised consecutive patients with necrotizing AP who underwent endoscopic cystogastrostomy (CG) of WON followed by PCD between September 2018 and March 2023. Based on endoscopic CG to PCD interval, patients were divided into groups (≤ and >3 days, ≤ and >1 week, ≤ and >10 days, and ≤ and >2 weeks). Baseline characteristics and indications of CG and PCD were recorded. Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups, including length of hospitalization, length of intensive care unit stay, need for surgical necrosectomy, and death during hospitalization.\\n Results Thirty patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 35.5 ± 12.7 years) were evaluated. The mean CG to PCD interval was 11.2 ± 7.5 days. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics and indications of CG and PCD between the groups. The mean pain to CG interval was not significantly different between the groups. Endoscopic necrosectomy was performed in a significantly greater proportion of patients undergoing CG after 10 days (p = 0.003) and after 2 weeks (p = 0.032). There were no significant differences in the complications and clinical outcomes between the groups.\\n Conclusion The timing of PCD following endoscopic CG does not affect clinical outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":506648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1779303\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1779303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 对急性胰腺炎(AP)患者的脱壁坏死(WON)进行双模式引流的作用已经确立。然而,目前还没有关于临床结果与经皮导管引流术(PCD)时机相关性的数据。我们研究了内镜引流 WON 后 PCD 的时机对 AP 临床预后的影响。材料和方法 这项回顾性研究包括在 2018 年 9 月至 2023 年 3 月间接受内镜下 WON 膀胱造口术(CG),然后进行 PCD 的坏死性 AP 连续患者。根据内镜下CG到PCD的间隔时间,将患者分为几组(≤和>3天、≤和>1周、≤和>10天、≤和>2周)。记录了CG和PCD的基线特征和适应症。比较两组患者的临床结果,包括住院时间、重症监护室住院时间、是否需要进行外科坏死切除术以及住院期间的死亡情况。结果 评估了 30 名患者(平均年龄 ± 标准差,35.5 ± 12.7 岁)。从 CG 到 PCD 的平均间隔时间为 11.2 ± 7.5 天。两组患者的基线特征、CG 和 PCD 适应症无明显差异。两组患者从疼痛到CG的平均间隔时间无明显差异。接受CG治疗的患者中,10天后(P = 0.003)和2周后(P = 0.032)进行内镜坏死切除术的比例明显更高。两组患者的并发症和临床结果无明显差异。结论 内镜 CG 术后 PCD 的时机不会影响临床效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of the Timing of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage Following Endoscopic Drainage on Outcomes in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis
Background The role of dual-modality drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) is established. However, there are no data on the association of clinical outcomes with the timing of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD). We investigated the impact of the timing of PCD following endoscopic drainage of WON on clinical outcomes in AP. Materials and Methods This retrospective study comprised consecutive patients with necrotizing AP who underwent endoscopic cystogastrostomy (CG) of WON followed by PCD between September 2018 and March 2023. Based on endoscopic CG to PCD interval, patients were divided into groups (≤ and >3 days, ≤ and >1 week, ≤ and >10 days, and ≤ and >2 weeks). Baseline characteristics and indications of CG and PCD were recorded. Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups, including length of hospitalization, length of intensive care unit stay, need for surgical necrosectomy, and death during hospitalization. Results Thirty patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 35.5 ± 12.7 years) were evaluated. The mean CG to PCD interval was 11.2 ± 7.5 days. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics and indications of CG and PCD between the groups. The mean pain to CG interval was not significantly different between the groups. Endoscopic necrosectomy was performed in a significantly greater proportion of patients undergoing CG after 10 days (p = 0.003) and after 2 weeks (p = 0.032). There were no significant differences in the complications and clinical outcomes between the groups. Conclusion The timing of PCD following endoscopic CG does not affect clinical outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信