当前位置: X-MOL 学术Abdom. Radiol. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Health-Related Quality of Life evaluation in "left" versus "right" access for percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage using EORTC QLQBIL-21 questionnaire: a randomized controlled trial.
Abdominal Radiology ( IF 2.4 ) Pub Date : 2020-04-01 , DOI: 10.1007/s00261-019-02136-7
Davide Castiglione 1 , Cecilia Gozzo 1 , Luca Mammino 2 , Giovanni Failla 3 , Stefano Palmucci 2 , Antonio Basile 2
Affiliation  

PURPOSE To investigate the impact of the different access for percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in terms of "Quality of Life" (QoL) in the management of malignant obstructive jaundice. METHODS In this IRB-approved study, 64 consecutive patients with malignant obstructive jaundice were prospectively randomized to the right (group A) or left access (group B) for PTBD between February 2017 and December 2018. In order to demonstrate differences in terms of QoL between these groups, patients were asked to complete the "EORTC QLQ-BIL21" questionnaire the week after the treatment. Continuous variables were summarized by mean ± SD and compared using a Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainages were performed through right access in 31 cases and 33 cases through left access. Technical success was achieved in all cases (100%). During 1 week's follow-up, there was a significant difference between group A and B in terms of pain (p < 0.001). Group A showed higher intercostal pain and respiratory difficulties compared to group B. Moreover, patients of group A showed a higher level of tiredness, anxiety, and more difficult tubes drainage and bags management than group B patients. CONCLUSION In our experience, the use of the questionnaires showed the right access is associated with intercostal pain and respiratory difficulties. Left access for PTBD provides a better Quality of Life for patients who underwent PTBD as palliative treatment for the management of malignant obstructive jaundice and could be considered as the approach of choice in case of distal obstruction.

中文翻译:

使用EORTC QLQBIL-21问卷对经皮经肝胆道引流的“左”与“右”通路的健康相关生活质量评估:一项随机对照试验。

目的探讨“生活质量”(QoL)方面不同经皮肝穿刺胆道引流(PTBD)途径对恶性阻塞性黄疸治疗的影响。方法在这项IRB批准的研究中,将2017年2月至2018年12月之间连续64例恶性阻塞性黄疸患者随机分为PTBD的右(A组)或左入路(B组)。为了证明QoL方面的差异在这些组之间,要求患者在治疗后一周完成“ EORTC QLQ-BIL21”问卷。连续变量通过平均值±SD进行汇总,并使用Mann-Whitney U检验进行比较。结果31例经右肝穿刺经肝胆道引流,左入33例。在所有情况下(100%)都获得了技术上的成功。在1周的随访期间,A组和B组在疼痛方面存在显着差异(p <0.001)。与B组相比,A组的肋间疼痛和呼吸困难更高。此外,A组的患者比B组的患者表现出更高的疲倦,焦虑水平,并且引流和袋囊管理更困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。在1周的随访期间,A组和B组在疼痛方面存在显着差异(p <0.001)。与B组相比,A组的肋间疼痛和呼吸困难更高。此外,A组的患者比B组的患者表现出更高的疲倦,焦虑水平,并且引流和袋囊管理更困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。在1周的随访期间,A组和B组在疼痛方面存在显着差异(p <0.001)。与B组相比,A组的肋间疼痛和呼吸困难更高。此外,A组的患者比B组的患者表现出更高的疲倦,焦虑水平,并且引流和袋囊管理更困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。001)。与B组相比,A组的肋间疼痛和呼吸困难更高。此外,A组的患者比B组的患者表现出更高的疲倦,焦虑水平,并且引流和袋囊管理更困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。001)。与B组相比,A组的肋间疼痛和呼吸困难更高。此外,A组的患者比B组的患者表现出更高的疲倦,焦虑水平,并且引流和袋囊管理更困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。与B组患者相比,导尿管引流和袋管理更加困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。与B组患者相比,导尿管引流和袋管理更加困难。结论根据我们的经验,问卷的使用表明正确的出入与肋间疼痛和呼吸困难有关。PTBD的左入路为接受PTBD作为姑息治疗恶性阻塞性黄疸的患者提供了更好的生活质量,在远端阻塞的情况下可以考虑将其作为选择的方法。
更新日期:2020-04-03
down
wechat
bug