期刊文献+

Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography performed without radiography and with ultrasound-guidance in the management of acute pancreaticobiliary disease in pregnant patients 被引量:1

Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography performed without radiography and with ultrasound-guidance in the management of acute pancreaticobiliary disease in pregnant patients
原文传递
导出
摘要 Background Currently, the recommendation when treating acute biliary or pancreatic disease during pregnancy is to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) without radiation exposure, either empirically (with no radiographic guidance) or with ultrasound guidance. However, few published studies compared these two ways. This study aimed to compare ultrasound-guided ERCP with the procedure without radiographic guidance in the treatment of acute pancreaticobiliary disease in pregnant patients. Methods The clinical data of 68 pregnant patients with acute pancreaticobiliary disease admitted to our hospital between January 2004 and May 2010 were reviewed retrospectively. ERCP was performed without radiographic guidance in 36 cases (group A) and with ultrasound guidance in 32 cases (group B). Data on the following variables were compared between the two groups: surgical success rate, rate of complete stone removal, time to resolution of clinical manifestations and laboratory indicators, length of hospital stay, complications, outcome and differences in efficacy of ERCP during different stages of pregnancy. Results In group A, the rates of surgical success and complete removal of stones were 69% and 60%, respectively; the corresponding values were 91% and 89% in group B (P 〈0.05). Postoperatively, clinical manifestations improved rapidly in all patients; there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P 〉0.05). Leukocyte counts and liver function had improved significantly after one week in all patients; they recovered more quickly in group B ((8.64±1.83) days vs. (14.57±3.74) days, (14.29±4.64) days vs. (20.00±5.40) days, P 〈0.01). The hospital stay was shorter in group B ((16.28±7.25) days vs. (28.00±6.83) days, P〈0.001). The complication rate was 14% in group A and 3% in group B (P 〈0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the procedure's efficacy during different stages of pregnancy. Conclusions In the treatment of acute pancreaticobiliary disease during pregnancy, ultrasound-guided ERCP is safer and more effective than performing the procedure empirically without radiographic guidance when performed by experienced practitioners. Its more widespread use is recommended. Background Currently, the recommendation when treating acute biliary or pancreatic disease during pregnancy is to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) without radiation exposure, either empirically (with no radiographic guidance) or with ultrasound guidance. However, few published studies compared these two ways. This study aimed to compare ultrasound-guided ERCP with the procedure without radiographic guidance in the treatment of acute pancreaticobiliary disease in pregnant patients. Methods The clinical data of 68 pregnant patients with acute pancreaticobiliary disease admitted to our hospital between January 2004 and May 2010 were reviewed retrospectively. ERCP was performed without radiographic guidance in 36 cases (group A) and with ultrasound guidance in 32 cases (group B). Data on the following variables were compared between the two groups: surgical success rate, rate of complete stone removal, time to resolution of clinical manifestations and laboratory indicators, length of hospital stay, complications, outcome and differences in efficacy of ERCP during different stages of pregnancy. Results In group A, the rates of surgical success and complete removal of stones were 69% and 60%, respectively; the corresponding values were 91% and 89% in group B (P 〈0.05). Postoperatively, clinical manifestations improved rapidly in all patients; there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P 〉0.05). Leukocyte counts and liver function had improved significantly after one week in all patients; they recovered more quickly in group B ((8.64±1.83) days vs. (14.57±3.74) days, (14.29±4.64) days vs. (20.00±5.40) days, P 〈0.01). The hospital stay was shorter in group B ((16.28±7.25) days vs. (28.00±6.83) days, P〈0.001). The complication rate was 14% in group A and 3% in group B (P 〈0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the procedure's efficacy during different stages of pregnancy. Conclusions In the treatment of acute pancreaticobiliary disease during pregnancy, ultrasound-guided ERCP is safer and more effective than performing the procedure empirically without radiographic guidance when performed by experienced practitioners. Its more widespread use is recommended.
出处 《Chinese Medical Journal》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2013年第1期46-50,共5页 中华医学杂志(英文版)
关键词 acute biliarypancreatitis acute cholangitis CHOLEDOCHOLITHIASIS endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography PREGNANCY acute biliarypancreatitis acute cholangitis choledocholithiasis endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pregnancy
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献34

  • 1Basso L,McCollum PT,Darling MR,Tocchi A,Tanner WA.A study of cholelithiasis during pregnancy and its relationship with age,parity,menarche,breast-feeding,dysmenorrhea,oral contraception and a maternal history of cholelithiasis.Surg Gynecol Obstet 1992; 175:41-46.
  • 2Jamidar PA,Beck GJ,Hoffman BJ,Lehman GA,Hawes RH,Agrawal RM,Ashok PS,Ravi TJ,Cunningham JT,Troiano F.Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in pregnancy.Am J Gastroenterol 1995; 90:1263-1267.
  • 3Swisher SG,Schmit PJ,Hunt KK,Hiyama DT,Bennion RS,Swisher EM,Thompson JE.Biliary disease during pregnancy.Am J Surg 1994; 168:576-589; discussion 580-581.
  • 4Baillie J,Cairns SR,Putman WS,Cotton PB.Endoscopic management of choledocholithiasis during pregnancy.Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990; 171:1-4.
  • 5McKay AJ,O'Neill J,Imrie CW.Pancreatitis,pregnancy and gallstones.Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1980; 87:47-50.
  • 6Tham TC,Vandervoort J,Wong RC,Montes H,Roston AD,Slivka A,Ferrari AP,Lichtenstein DR,Van Dam J,Nawfel RD,Soetikno R,Carr-Locke DL.Safety of ERCP during pregnancy.Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98:308-311.
  • 7Goldschmiedt M,Wolf L,Shires T.Treatment of symptomatic choledocholithiasis during pregnancy.Gastrointest Endosc 1993; 39:812-814.
  • 8Farca A,Aguilar ME,Rodriguez G,de la Mora G,Arango L.Biliary stents as temporary treatment for choledocholithiasis in pregnant patients.Gastrointest Endosc 1997; 46:99-101.
  • 9Kahaleh M,Hartwell GD,Arseneau KO,Pajewski TN,Mullick T,Isin G,Agarwal S,Yeaton P.Safety and efficacyof ERCP in pregnancy.Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60:287-292.
  • 10Sungler P,Heinerman PM,Steiner H,Waclawiczek HW,Holzinger J,Mayer F,Heuberger A,Boeckl O.Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and interventional endoscopy for gallstone complications during pregnancy.Surg Endosc 2000; 14:267-271.

共引文献28

同被引文献6

引证文献1

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部