切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版)

中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (05): 298 -303. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6899.2021.05.009

论著 上一篇    下一篇

超声内镜引导下金属支架引流与经皮肾镜清创治疗胰腺包裹性坏死的疗效比较
赵丹琪 1, 柴宁莉 1 , †( ), 令狐恩强 1, 李隆松 1, 张波 1, 徐宁 1, 蔡守旺 2, 刘志伟 2   
  1. 1. 100853 北京，解放军总医院第一医学中心消化内科医学部
    2. 100853 北京，解放军总医院肝胆胰外科医学部
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-13 出版日期:2021-10-30
  • 通信作者: 柴宁莉

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage with metal stent and percutaneous nephroscopic necrosectomy for walled off necrosis

Danqi Zhao 1, Ningli Chai 1 , †( ), Enqiang Linghu 1, Longsong Li 1, Bo Zhang 1, Ning Xu 1, Shouwang Cai 2, Zhiwei Liu 2   

  1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
    2. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
  • Received:2021-08-13 Published:2021-10-30
  • Corresponding author: Ningli Chai
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( )
目的

比较超声内镜引导下金属支架引流与经皮肾镜清创治疗胰腺包裹性坏死(walled off necrosis, WON)的疗效，并探讨不同部位WON的最佳治疗模式。

方法

回顾性分析2018年10月至2020年12月于解放军总医院第一医学中心行超声内镜引导下金属支架引流治疗或行经皮肾镜清创治疗的WON患者临床资料，比较两组的治疗成功率、手术时间、并发症、住院时间、住院费用等。

结果

纳入的38例患者中13例为超声内镜组，WON位置均局限在胰腺或胰周；25例为经皮肾镜组，其中14例局限在胰腺或胰周。两组治疗成功率、并发症均差异无统计学意义。对于位置相同的WON，两组的治疗成功率、并发症差异无统计学意义；但超声内镜组的中位手术时间、住院时间、住院费用均小于经皮肾镜组[37.0 min(22.0~49.5 min)比90.0 min(52.5~135.0 min)，P<0.001；8 d(6~12.5 d)比19 d(9~40 d)，P＝0.002；40 550元(36 734~67 640元)比94 151元(69 813~251 510元)，P<0.001]。

结论

对于WON局限在胰腺或胰周的患者，适合行超声内镜下金属支架引流；当WON累及腹腔或盆腔时适合经皮肾镜清创治疗；若患者同时有多个不同部位的囊腔，可考虑超声内镜联合经皮肾镜清创治疗。

关键词: 胰腺包裹性坏死, 金属支架, 超声内镜, 引流, 经皮肾镜
Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS-guided) drainage with metal stent and percutaneous nephroscopic necrosectomy in the treatment of walled off necrosis (WON), and to discuss the best treatment mode of WON at different sites.

Methods

The clinical datas of patients with WON who underwent EUS-guided drainage with metal stent or percutaneous nephroscopic necrosectomy in our hospital from Oct. 2018 to Dec. 2020 were retrospectively analyzed, and the treatment success rate, procedure duration, complications, hospital stay and cost et al between the two groups were compared.

Results

Thirteen of 38 patients included in the EUS group, and WON were confined to the pancreas or peripancreatic area. Of the 25 patients in the percutaneous nephroscopy group, 14 patients had localized to pancreas or peripancreatic area. There was no statistical difference in treatment success rate and complication rate between the two groups. And there was no statistical difference in treatment success rate and complication rate between the two groups for the WON confined to pancreas or peripancreatic area. However, the median duration of procedure, median hospital stay and median cost in the EUS group was less than that in the percutaneous nephroscopy group [(37.0 min(22.0-49.5 min) vs 90.0 min(52.5-135.0 min), P<0.00; 8 d(6-12.5 d) vs 19 d(9-40 d), P=0.002; 40 550 CNY[36 734-67 640 CNY) vs 94 151 CNY(69 813-251 510 CNY), P< 0.001].

Conclusions

EUS-guided drainage with metal stent is suitable for patients with WON confined to pancreas or peripancreatic area and close to gastric wall. Percutaneous nephroscopic necrosectomy is more suitable for WON involving abdominal cavity and pelvic cavity and far from the gastric wall. If the patient has different sites of cysts at the same time, EUS-guided drainage combined with percutaneous nephroscopic necrosectomy can be considered.

Key words: Walled-off necrosis, Metal stent, Endoscopic ultrasound, Drainage, Percutaneous nephroscope
图1 超声内镜引导下金属支架引流治疗胰腺包裹性坏死及CT对比
表1 两组胰腺包裹性坏死患者的一般资料比较
项目 超声内镜组(13例) 经皮肾镜组(25例) 统计值 P值
年龄[岁，中位数(P25~P75)] 44.0(36.5~60.5) 36.0(28.0~55.0)   0.124
性别[男，例(%)] 6(46.2) 18(72.0) χ2＝2.455 0.163
体质量指数(kg/m2, ±s) 23.05±3.45 23.63±3.79 t＝-0.408 0.687
主要临床症状(例)        
  腹痛 10 15 χ2＝1.088 0.473
  腹胀 4 9 χ2＝0.104 >0.999
  恶心、呕吐 1 1 χ2＝0.234 >0.999
  发热 3 13 χ2＝2.935 0.165
  梗阻性症状 0 2 χ2＝1.098 0.538
术前囊肿大小(cm， ±s) 10.91±2.52 14.42±4.81 t＝-2.954 0.005
囊肿部位(例)     χ2＝8.050 0.006
  仅胰腺或胰周 13 14    
  累及腹腔和(或)盆腔 0 11    
CT囊内可见气泡[例(%)] 1(7.7) 11(44.0) χ2＝5.218 0.030
术前ASA分级(例)        
  Ⅰ 1 0 χ2＝1.975 0.342
  Ⅱ 11 14 χ2＝3.112 0.148
  Ⅲ 1 10 χ2＝4.340 0.060
  Ⅳ 0 1 χ2＝0.534 >0.999
表2 胰腺包裹性坏死局限在胰腺或胰周的两组患者一般资料比较
项目 超声内镜组(13例) 经皮肾镜组(14例) 统计值 P值
年龄[岁， ±s] 40.0±12.1 46.0±17.3 t＝0.409 0.686
性别[男，例(%)] 6(46.2) 12(85.7) χ2＝4.747 0.046
体质量指数(kg/m2， ±s) 23.05±3.45 23.21±3.71 t＝-1.07 0.916
主要临床症状(例)        
  腹痛 10 11 χ2＝0.011 >0.999
  腹胀 4 5 χ2＝0.074 >0.999
  恶心、呕吐 1 0 χ2＝1.118 0.481
  发热 3 7 χ2＝2.095 0.236
术前囊肿大小(cm， ±s) 10.91±2.52 13.74±4.87 t＝-1.874 0.073
CT囊内可见气泡[例(%)] 1(7.7) 6(42.8) χ2＝4.340 0.077
术前ASA分级(例)        
  Ⅰ 1 0 χ2＝1.118 0.481
  Ⅱ 11 7 χ2＝3.635 0.103
  Ⅲ 1 7 χ2＝5.787 0.033
表3 两组胰腺包裹性坏死患者的临床结果比较
项目 超声内镜组(13例) 经皮肾镜组(25例) χ2值 P值
技术成功[例(%)] 12(92.3) 25(100.0) 1.975 0.342
治疗成功[例(%)] 9(69.2) 15(60.0) 0.313 0.728
手术时间[min,中位数(P25~P75)] 37.0(22.0~49.5) 90.0(52.5~135.0)   <0.001
术中出血量[ml，中位数(P25~P75)] 0.0(0.0~0.5) 50.0(35.0~100.0)   <0.001
术后再干预[例(%)] 10(76.9) 10(40.0) 4.677 0.043
  内镜下清创 10 0    
  经皮肾镜清创 0 9    
  开腹探查 0 1    
再干预次数[次，中位数(P25~P75)] 1.0(0.5~2.0) 0.0(0.0~1.0)   0.008
清创时间[min/次，中位数(P25~P75)] 25.0(0.0~33.3) 92.0(55.0~134.3)   <0.001
合并其他引流[例(%)] 2(15.4) 25(100.0) 38.000 <0.001
并发症[例(%)] 5(38.5) 11(44.0) 0.108 >0.999
  感染 3 7    
  出血 1 2    
  穿孔 0 1    
  死亡 0 0    
  其他 1 3    
住院时间[d，中位数(P25~P75)] 8.0(6.0~12.5) 19.0(9.0~40.0)   0.002
住院费用[元，中位数(P25~P75)] 40 550(36 734~67 640) 118 036(75 162~236 016)   <0.001
表4 胰腺包裹性坏死局限在胰腺或胰周的两组患者的临床结果比较
临床结果 超声内镜组(13例) 经皮肾镜组(14例) 统计值 P值
技术成功[例(%)] 12(92.3) 14(100.0)   0.481
治疗成功[例(%)] 9(69.2) 8(57.1) χ2＝0.422 0.695
手术时间(min， ±s) 35.7±15.35 77.7±40.48 t＝-3.614 0.002
术中出血量[ml，中位数(P25~P75)] 0.0(0.0~0.5) 50.0(20.0~62.5)   <0.001
术后再干预[例(%)] 10(76.9) 3(21.4) χ2＝8.315 0.007
  内镜下清创 10 0    
  经皮肾镜清创 0 2    
  开腹探查 0 1    
再干预次数[次，中位数(P25~P75)] 1(0.5~2.0) 0(0.0~0.3)   0.002
清创时间[min/次，中位数(P25~P75)] 25.0(0.0~33.3) 70.0(45.6~101.9)   <0.001
合并其他引流[例(%)] 2(15.4) 14(100.0) χ2＝27.000 <0.001
并发症[例(%)] 5(38.5) 6(42.8) χ2＝0.054 0.816
  感染 3 5    
  出血 1 1    
  穿孔 0 0    
  死亡 0 0    
  其他 1 0    
住院时间[d，中位数(P25~P75)] 8(6.0~12.5) 11(8.8，32.0)   0.036
住院费用[元，中位数(P25~P75)] 40 550(36 734~67 640) 94 151(69 813~251 510)   <0.001
1
Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C, et al. Classification of acute pancreatitis--2012 : revision of the atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus[J]. Gut, 2013, 62(1): 102-111.
2
张炎祥，陈小伍，朱达坚，等．重症急性胰腺炎腹腔镜术后冲洗及引流策略[J/CD]． 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版)， 2016， 9(6): 351-353.
3
陈玉辉，蔡守旺，刘志伟，等．经皮肾镜清创联合经胃经皮穿刺引流治疗重症急性胰腺炎合并包裹性坏死一例[J]． 中华肝胆外科杂志， 2020， 26(5): 387-388.
4
Lang GD, Fritz C, Bhat T, et al. EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections with lumen-apposing metal stents and plastic double-pigtail stents: comparison of efficacy and adverse event rates[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2018, 87(1): 150-157.
5
Gornals JB, Consiglieri CF, Busquets J, et al. Endoscopic necrosectomy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis using a lumen-apposing metal stent and irrigation technique[J]. Surg Endosc, 2016, 30(6): 2592-602.
6
Yoo J, Yan L, Hasan R, et al. Feasibility, safety, and outcomes of a single-step endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections without fluoroscopy using a novel electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing, self-expanding metal stent[J]. Endosc Ultrasound, 2017, 6(2): 131-135.
7
Arvanitakis M, Dumonceau JM, Albert J, et al. Endoscopic management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis : european society of gastrointestinal endoscopy (ESGE) evidence-based multidisciplinary guidelines[J]. Endoscopy, 2018, 50(5): 524-546.
8
Baron TH, DiMaio CJ, Wang AY, et al. American gastroenterological association clinical practice update: management of pancreatic necrosis[J]. Gastroenterology, 2020, 158(1): 67-75.
9
Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Sutton BS, et al. Equal efficacy of endoscopic and surgical cystogastrostomy for pancreatic pseudocyst drainage in a randomized trial[J]. Gastroenterology, 2013, 145(3): 583-590.
10
Szakó L, Mátrai P, Hegyi P, et al. Endoscopic and surgical drainage for pancreatic fluid collections are better than percutaneous drainage: meta-analysis[J]. Pancreatology, 2020, 20(1): 132-141.
11
Chen YI, Yang JL, Friedland S, et al. Lumen apposing metal stents are superior to plastic stents in pancreatic walled-off necrosis: a large international multicenter study[J]. Endosc Int Open, 2019, 7(3): 347-354.
12
Garg PK, Meena D, Babu D, et al. Endoscopic versus laparoscopic drainage of pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis following acute pancreatitis: a randomized trial[J]. Surg Endosc, 2020, 34(3): 1157-1166.
13
赵丹琪，令狐恩强，柴宁莉．内镜超声引导下新型全覆膜金属支架置入后移位一例[J]． 中华消化内镜杂志， 2021， 38(4): 325-326.
14
Costa JM, Goncalves BM, Costa RS, et al. Endoscopic management of stent displacement after pancreatic pseudocyst drainage[J]. Endoscopy, 2018, 50(10): 304-306.
15
Wang GX, Liu X, Wang S, et al. Stent displacement in endoscopic pancreatic pseudocyst drainage and endoscopic management[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2015, 21(7): 2249-2253.
16
Bang JY, Wilcox CM, Arnoletti JP, et al. Superiority of endoscopic interventions over minimally invasive surgery for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: meta-analysis of randomized trials[J]. Dig Endosc, 2020, 32(3): 298-308.
17
Sandra B, Janneke G, Hjalmar CS, et al. Endoscopic or surgical step-up approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis: a multicentre randomised trial[J]. The Lancet, 2018, 391(10115) : 51-58.
18
Gardner TB, Chahal P, Papachristou GI, et al. A comparison of direct endoscopic necrosectomy with transmural endoscopic drainage for the treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2009, 69(6): 1085-1094.
[1] 刘小垒, 周义钦, 钱齐荣. 髋关节置换术后引流与术后感染相关性的荟萃分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(03): 302-306.
[2] 陈亮, 沈岩. 早期引流干预在重症急性胰腺炎治疗中的临床价值[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(03): 213-216.
[3] 谢杰, 王强东, 董振佳, 肖旭, 杨银. 可视穿刺经皮肾镜治疗≤2 cm肾下盏结石的临床应用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 285-288.
[4] 卢凯, 陈智慧, 叶绍强, 骆峰, 罗惠兰. 经皮肾镜术后全身炎症反应综合征的危险因素[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 289-293.
[5] 王彦刚, 宋培星, 邢德福, 李亮亮, 吴亚蒙, 董安涛, 黄振宇, 叶元平. 俯卧"大"字位在双镜联合一期治疗复杂性肾结石中的效果分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 294-298.
[6] 黄华生, 郑哲明, 陈早庆, 郁兆存, 方钟进, 谢永康. 斜仰卧截石位与俯卧位经中上盏入路微通道经皮肾镜的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 299-303.
[7] 徐锦斌, 祝钦, 黄健, 邓拓, 张世科, 吴文起. 微通道经皮肾镜联合输尿管软镜与否治疗复杂肾结石的Meta分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(03): 237-243.
[8] 尉腊革, 李毅, 张建辉, 刘彦军, 李东迂, 栾中华. 单孔胸腔镜肺癌根治术后不同胸腔引流液量时拔管的康复分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 478-480.
[9] 宁波, 柴宁莉, 李惠凯, 冯秀雪, 杜晨, 李笑, 张晓彬, 赵鑫, 令狐恩强. 基于新评价体系的胰腺囊性肿瘤消融有效性分析[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(05): 293-297.
[10] 龙港, 高悦, 李爱东, 吕令伟, 李正天. 胰腺假性囊肿的腹腔镜手术治疗[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 248-253.
[11] 马锋, 冯文宇, 张谞丰, 牟怡平, 刘学民, 李宇, 张晓刚, 仵正, 王博, 吴荣谦, 于良, 李强, 吕毅. 非寄生虫性肝囊肿临床特征及干预治疗影响因素分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2021, 10(03): 314-317.
[12] 张昊悦, 章阳, 王业皇. 中药浸渍-吸灌动态管理法对高位复杂性肛瘘切开挂线术后创面影响的临床研究[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(04): 379-384.
[13] 杨占宇, 王旼娴, 龙青燕, 黄犇, 周学梅, 郭艳萍. 手法淋巴引流结合肌内效贴治疗中早期手碾压伤患者肿胀的临床研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2021, 07(03): 164-169.
[14] 李琴, 莫伟, 阳秀春, 李玉莲, 周碧芳. 经皮肝穿刺胆道引流术后患者延续护理现状[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2021, 09(03): 340-344.
[15] 董博, 齐旭丽, 吴春莉, 齐宇. 食管神经鞘瘤：个案报道和文献复习[J]. 中华胸部外科电子杂志, 2021, 08(03): 182-185.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号