4.7 Article

Outcomes of early endoscopic intervention for pancreatic necrotic collections: a matched case-control study

期刊

GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
卷 91, 期 6, 页码 1303-1309

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.017

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aims: Pancreatic necrosis may be categorized as an acute necrotic collection (ANC) or walledoff necrosis (WON) based on complete encapsulation by a wall and collection age (<= 4 weeks or >4 weeks). Endoscopic intervention of WON has become the standard of care, but little is known regarding the safety and efficacy of endoscopic intervention of pancreatic necrosis <= 4 weeks from disease onset. Methods: Retrospective review of medical records and imaging studies of all patients undergoing early endoscopic intervention of pancreatic necrosis between 2008 and 2018 was carried out at 1 referral center. Patients who underwent previous interventional treatment were excluded. Control WON patients were matched to early intervention cases. The primary outcome was defined as resolution of the collection after endoscopic treatment, without surgery. Results: Nineteen patients with early intervention were identified. The most common indication for intervention was infection. Median age of these collections at the time of initial endoscopic intervention was 23 days (range, 15-27 days), and all collections had a partial or complete wall discernable on contrast-enhanced CT. Eleven patients underwent concurrent endoscopic necrosectomy. The primary outcome was achieved in all patients in the early intervention group. Total duration of therapy was longer for early intervention compared with controls (103 vs 69 days, P = .042), with no mortality and similar adverse event rates compared with controls. Conclusions: Endoscopic intervention of pancreatic necrosis in the third and fourth weeks of illness appears effective and safe when a partial collection wall is present on cross-sectional imaging studies, with outcomes paralleling those reported for intervention of WON.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据