经皮经肝胆囊引流与内镜下胆囊支架置入术对急性胆囊炎临床病程的回顾性比较研究:使用日本全国住院患者数据库进行倾向评分匹配分析。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Shota Ebinuma, Hiroyuki Nagano, Hisashi Itoshima, Susumu Kunisawa, Kiyohide Fushimi, Ryo Sugiura, Tatsuhiko Kakisaka, Akinobu Taketomi, Yuichi Imanaka
{"title":"经皮经肝胆囊引流与内镜下胆囊支架置入术对急性胆囊炎临床病程的回顾性比较研究:使用日本全国住院患者数据库进行倾向评分匹配分析。","authors":"Shota Ebinuma, Hiroyuki Nagano, Hisashi Itoshima, Susumu Kunisawa, Kiyohide Fushimi, Ryo Sugiura, Tatsuhiko Kakisaka, Akinobu Taketomi, Yuichi Imanaka","doi":"10.1002/jhbp.12114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We performed a retrospective comparative study to clarify the optimal gallbladder drainage method prior to elective cholecystectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected data from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database about cholecystitis patients who underwent gallbladder drainage prior to cholecystectomy in a subsequent hospitalization between April 2014 and March 2020. We divided the study population into two groups: an endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) group and a percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) group. We performed propensity score matching and compared surgical outcomes related to cholecystectomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We collected 6306 cases (PTGBD: 6112 cases; EGBS: 194 cases). In propensity score matching, we obtained 193 matched pairs from the study population. Long-term postoperative antibiotics therapy (2 vs. 9; risk ratio 4.7 [95% CI: 1.1-30.9]) was more frequent in the EGBS group than the PTGBD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups for laparotomic cholecystectomy and postoperative bile duct drainage. For reoperation, postoperative abdominal drainage and postoperative blood transfusion, there were few outcome occurrences and effect measures were not obtained.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gallbladder drainage by EGBS may have more risk of surgical complications related to elective cholecystectomy than PTGBD. There are a few reports on this topic, so further research should be conducted.</p>","PeriodicalId":16056,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A retrospective comparative study of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage versus endoscopic gallbladder stenting on the clinical course of acute cholecystitis: A propensity score matching analysis using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan.\",\"authors\":\"Shota Ebinuma, Hiroyuki Nagano, Hisashi Itoshima, Susumu Kunisawa, Kiyohide Fushimi, Ryo Sugiura, Tatsuhiko Kakisaka, Akinobu Taketomi, Yuichi Imanaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhbp.12114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We performed a retrospective comparative study to clarify the optimal gallbladder drainage method prior to elective cholecystectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected data from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database about cholecystitis patients who underwent gallbladder drainage prior to cholecystectomy in a subsequent hospitalization between April 2014 and March 2020. We divided the study population into two groups: an endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) group and a percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) group. We performed propensity score matching and compared surgical outcomes related to cholecystectomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We collected 6306 cases (PTGBD: 6112 cases; EGBS: 194 cases). In propensity score matching, we obtained 193 matched pairs from the study population. Long-term postoperative antibiotics therapy (2 vs. 9; risk ratio 4.7 [95% CI: 1.1-30.9]) was more frequent in the EGBS group than the PTGBD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups for laparotomic cholecystectomy and postoperative bile duct drainage. For reoperation, postoperative abdominal drainage and postoperative blood transfusion, there were few outcome occurrences and effect measures were not obtained.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gallbladder drainage by EGBS may have more risk of surgical complications related to elective cholecystectomy than PTGBD. There are a few reports on this topic, so further research should be conducted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.12114\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.12114","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:我们进行了一项回顾性比较研究,以阐明择期胆囊切除术前的最佳胆囊引流方法。方法:我们从2014年4月至2020年3月期间在胆囊切除术前接受胆囊引流并随后住院的胆囊炎患者的诊断程序组合数据库中收集数据。我们将研究人群分为两组:内镜胆囊支架置入术(EGBS)组和经皮经肝胆囊引流术(PTGBD)组。我们进行倾向评分匹配并比较胆囊切除术相关的手术结果。结果:共收集病例6306例(PTGBD: 6112例;EGBS: 194例)。在倾向评分匹配中,我们从研究人群中获得了193对匹配的配对。术后长期抗生素治疗(2 vs 9;风险比4.7 [95% CI: 1.1-30.9])在EGBS组中比PTGBD组更常见。两组在腹腔镜胆囊切除术及术后胆管引流方面无显著差异。再手术、术后腹腔引流及术后输血的结果发生较少,未得到有效措施。结论:EGBS胆囊引流术比PTGBD术更容易发生选择性胆囊切除术相关并发症。关于这个话题的报道很少,所以需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A retrospective comparative study of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage versus endoscopic gallbladder stenting on the clinical course of acute cholecystitis: A propensity score matching analysis using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan.

Background: We performed a retrospective comparative study to clarify the optimal gallbladder drainage method prior to elective cholecystectomy.

Methods: We collected data from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database about cholecystitis patients who underwent gallbladder drainage prior to cholecystectomy in a subsequent hospitalization between April 2014 and March 2020. We divided the study population into two groups: an endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) group and a percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) group. We performed propensity score matching and compared surgical outcomes related to cholecystectomy.

Results: We collected 6306 cases (PTGBD: 6112 cases; EGBS: 194 cases). In propensity score matching, we obtained 193 matched pairs from the study population. Long-term postoperative antibiotics therapy (2 vs. 9; risk ratio 4.7 [95% CI: 1.1-30.9]) was more frequent in the EGBS group than the PTGBD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups for laparotomic cholecystectomy and postoperative bile duct drainage. For reoperation, postoperative abdominal drainage and postoperative blood transfusion, there were few outcome occurrences and effect measures were not obtained.

Conclusion: Gallbladder drainage by EGBS may have more risk of surgical complications related to elective cholecystectomy than PTGBD. There are a few reports on this topic, so further research should be conducted.

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
Journal of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sciences
Journal of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Sciences GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
自引率
10.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences (JHBPS) is the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences. JHBPS publishes articles dealing with clinical research as well as translational research on all aspects of this field. Coverage includes Original Article, Review Article, Images of Interest, Rapid Communication and an announcement section. Letters to the Editor and comments on the journal’s policies or content are also included. JHBPS welcomes submissions from surgeons, physicians, endoscopists, radiologists, oncologists, and pathologists.
×
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