• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy International Open >Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage may be the preferred preoperative drainage method in hilar cholangiocarcinoma
【24h】

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage may be the preferred preoperative drainage method in hilar cholangiocarcinoma

机译：经皮的胆管胆道引流可以是禽类胆管癌中的优选术前排水方法

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background and study aims?Preoperative biliary drainage of hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HC) is controversial. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical outcome and associated complications for types II, III, and IV HC managed by percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Patients and methods?Between January 2011 and June 2017, a total of 180 patients with II, III, and IV HC were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. According to the drainage method, patients were divided into two groups: PTBD (n?=?81) and ERCP (n?=?99). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03104582, and was completed. Results?Compared with the PTBD group, the ERCP group had a higher incidence of post-procedural cholangitis (37 [37.37?%] vs. 18 [22.22?%], P?=?0.028) and pancreatitis (17 [17.17?%] vs. 2 [2.47?%], P?=?0.001); required more salvaged biliary drainage (18 [18.18?%] vs. 5 [6.17?%], P ?=?0.029), and incurred a higher cost (P??0.05). Patients with type III and IV HC in the ERCP group had more cholangitis than those in the PTBD group (26 [36.62?%] vs. 11 [18.03?%], P?=?0.018). The rate of cholangitis in patients who received endoscopic bilateral biliary stents insertion was higher than patients with unilateral stenting (23 [50.00?%] vs. 9 [26.47?%], P?=?0.034), and underwent PTBD internal-external drainage had a higher incidence of cholangitis than those with only external drainage (11 [34.36?%] vs. 7 [14.29?%], P?=?0.034). No significant difference in the rate of cholangitis was observed between the endoscopic unilateral stenting group and the endoscopic nasobiliary drainage group (9 [26.47?%] vs. 5 [26.32?%], P?=?0.990). Conclusion?Compared to ERCP, PTBD reduced the rate of cholangitis, pancreatitis, salvage biliary drainage, and decreased hospitalization costs in patients with types II, III, and IV HC. Risk of cholangitis for patients with types III and IV was significantly lower in the PTBD group. sup*/sup Yongjiang Ba and Ping Yue make the same contribution to this work.
机译：背景和研究旨在？禽闹胆管癌（HC）的术前胆​​道引流是有争议的。本研究的目标是将临床结果和相关的经皮转发胆道引流（PTBD）和内窥镜逆行胆管学（ERCP）管理的II，III和IV HC相关的临床结果和相关并发症进行比较。患者和方法？2011年1月至2017年6月，共有180名II，III和IV HC患者参加了这一回顾性队列研究。根据排水方法，患者分为两组：PTBD（n？=？81）和ERCP（n？=？99）。本研究在Clincoicaltrials.gov，NCT03104582注册，并完成。结果？与PTBD组相比，ERCP组的后程序性胆管炎的发病率较高（37 [37.37〜％]，第18次[22.22〜％]，p？= 0.028）和胰腺炎（17 [17.17吗？ ]与2 [2.47？％]，p？= 0.001）;需要更多的销售胆道排水（18 [18.18〜5.18℃]，5 [6.17？％]，p？= 0.029），并产生较高的成本（p？<？0.05）。 III型和IV HC患者在ERCP组中具有比PTBD组更高的胆管炎（26 [36.62〜％]，第11次[18.03〜0.1％]，p？= 0.018）。接受内窥镜双侧胆管插入的患者的胆管炎率高于单侧支架的患者（23 [50.00μm，50.00〜50.μl]，p？= 0.034），并进行PTBD内外排水胆管炎的发病率高于外部排水（11 [34.36〜％]，第7次[14.29〜％]，p？= 0.034）。观察到内镜单侧支架组和内镜鼻鼻鼻梭菌引流基团之间观察到胆管炎的速率显着差异（9 [26.47〜％]，p？= 0.990）。结论？与ERCP相比，PTBD减少了胆管炎，胰腺炎，抢救胆道引流的速率，并降低了II类，III和IV型HC患者的住院成本。 PTBD组中III型和IV型患者的胆管炎风险显着降低。 * 永江ba和ping yue对这项工作做出了相同的贡献。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号