We have located links that may give you full text access.
A Comparison of Percutaneous versus Endoscopic Drainage in the Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2020 May 31
INTRODUCTION: Currently, endoscopic drainage (ED) and percutaneous drainage (PD) are both widely used effective interventions in the management of patients with symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). This study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and safety of ED to those of PD in the treatment of PFCs.
MATERIAL/METHODS: A prospective cohort study of PFC patients who underwent ED or PD was conducted between January 2009 and December 2017. In this study, the initial success rate, adverse events, intervention, requirement of surgical treatment, hospital mortality within 30 days, length of hospital stay and expenses during hospitalization were monitored, and a follow-up investigation of treatment outcome was conducted. Long-term recovery, recurrence and mortality were determined according to telephone follow-up.
RESULTS: In total, 129 patients were included in the study; 62 patients underwent ED, and 67 patients underwent PD during the 8-year study period. Initial treatment success was considerably higher in patients whose PFCs were managed by ED than in patients whose PFCs were managed by PD (94.9% vs 65.0%, p=0.003). The rate of procedural adverse events, reintervention, length of hospitalization and expense were all higher in the PD group than in the ED group, but the long-term recovery rate and requirement of surgical intervention were not clearly different between patients who underwent the two treatment measures.
CONCLUSION: ED of symptomatic PFCs was associated with higher rates of initial treatment success, lower rates of reintervention and adverse events and a shorter hospital stay than PD of symptomatic PFCs.
MATERIAL/METHODS: A prospective cohort study of PFC patients who underwent ED or PD was conducted between January 2009 and December 2017. In this study, the initial success rate, adverse events, intervention, requirement of surgical treatment, hospital mortality within 30 days, length of hospital stay and expenses during hospitalization were monitored, and a follow-up investigation of treatment outcome was conducted. Long-term recovery, recurrence and mortality were determined according to telephone follow-up.
RESULTS: In total, 129 patients were included in the study; 62 patients underwent ED, and 67 patients underwent PD during the 8-year study period. Initial treatment success was considerably higher in patients whose PFCs were managed by ED than in patients whose PFCs were managed by PD (94.9% vs 65.0%, p=0.003). The rate of procedural adverse events, reintervention, length of hospitalization and expense were all higher in the PD group than in the ED group, but the long-term recovery rate and requirement of surgical intervention were not clearly different between patients who underwent the two treatment measures.
CONCLUSION: ED of symptomatic PFCs was associated with higher rates of initial treatment success, lower rates of reintervention and adverse events and a shorter hospital stay than PD of symptomatic PFCs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults.Gut 2024 April 17
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Should renin-angiotensin system inhibitors be held prior to major surgery?British Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 May
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2024.Endoscopy 2024 April 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app