当前位置: X-MOL 学术Sci. Rep. › 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.)
The influence of periampullary diverticula on ERCP for treatment of common bile duct stones.
Scientific Reports ( IF 3.8 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-10 , DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68471-8
Yang Hu 1 , Da-Qing Kou 2 , Shi-Bin Guo 1
Affiliation  

In order to evaluate the effectiveness of various methods we applied to decrease the influence of periampullary diverticula (PAD) on the success rate and complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones, we enrolled patients with CBD stones who had been treated by ERCP in our hospital between January 2015 and December 2018. According to the presence of PAD, the patients were divided into a PAD group and a non-PAD group. The rate of complete stone removal in the first session, the rate of overall stone removal, the frequency of application of mechanical lithotripsy, and procedure-related complications, including bleeding, hyperamylasemia, pancreatitis, perforation, and infection of biliary tract were recorded. A total of 183 cases, including 72 cases in the PAD group and 111 cases in the non-PAD group were enrolled. There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding gender (P = 0.354). However, regarding age, there was a statistical difference (P = 0.002), and the incidence of PAD increased with age. There were 5 (6.9%) cases in the PAD group and 14 (12.6%) cases in the non-PAD group where mechanical lithotripsy was applied. There were 59 (81.9%) cases in the PAD group and 102 (91.9%) cases in the non-PAD group where there was complete removal of CBD stones in the first session, and there were 68 (94.4%) cases in the PAD group and 107 (96.4%) cases in the non-PAD group where there was complete removal of all stones. In the PAD group, there were 0 cases (0%) with gastrointestinal bleeding, 0 cases (0%) with gastrointestinal perforation, 13 cases (18.1%) with post-ERCP hyperamylasemia, 3 cases (4.2%) with post-ERCP pancreatitis, and 4 cases (5.6%) with biliary tract infection. In the non-PAD group, 1 case (0.9%) had gastrointestinal bleeding, 0 cases had gastrointestinal perforation, 18 cases (16.2%) had post-ERCP hyperamylasemia, 5 cases (4.5%) had post-ERCP pancreatitis, and 11 cases (9.9%) had biliary tract infection. This retrospective study showed that there was a statistical difference between the two groups regarding complete removal of CBD stones in the first session and application of mechanical lithotripsy (both P < 0.05), but no statistical difference according to the rates of overall stone removal and the complications (P > 0.05), which means that we can reduce the influence of PAD on ERCP for treatment of common bile duct stones.



中文翻译:

壶腹周围憩室对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。

为了评估我们用于减少壶腹憩室(PAD)对内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)在胆总管(CBD)结石治疗中的成功率和并发症的影响的各种方法的有效性,我们招募了2015年1月至2018年12月在我院接受ERCP治疗的CBD结石。根据PAD的存在,将患者分为PAD组和非PAD组。记录第一节的完全结石清除率,总体结石清除率,机械碎石术的应用频率以及与手术相关的并发症,包括出血,高淀粉血症,胰腺炎,穿孔和胆道感染。总共183例,包括PAD组的72例和非PAD组的111例。两组在性别方面无统计学差异(P = 0.354)。但是,关于年龄,存在统计学差异(P = 0.002),并且PAD的发生率随着年龄的增长而增加。PAD组有5例(6.9%)病例,非PAD组有14例(12.6%)病例应用机械碎石术。PAD组中有59例(81.9%)病例,非PAD组中有102例(91.9%)病例在第一节中完全清除了CBD结石,而PAD中有68例(94.4%)病例PAD组和107例(96.4%)病例均已完全清除所有结石。在PAD组中,胃肠道出血0例(0%),胃肠道穿孔0例(0%),13例(18。ERCP后高淀粉血症的发生率为1%,ERCP后胰腺炎的发生率为3例(4.2%),胆道感染的发生率为4例(5.6%)。在非PAD组中,胃肠道出血1例(0.9%),胃肠道穿孔0例,ERCP后高淀粉样血症18例(16.2%),ERCP后胰腺炎5例(4.5%),11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。ERCP后胰腺炎为2%),胆道感染为4例(5.6%)。在非PAD组中,胃肠道出血1例(0.9%),胃肠道穿孔0例,ERCP后高淀粉样血症18例(16.2%),ERCP后胰腺炎5例(4.5%),11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。ERCP后胰腺炎为2%),胆道感染为4例(5.6%)。在非PAD组中,胃肠道出血1例(0.9%),胃肠道穿孔0例,ERCP术后高淀粉样血症18例(16.2%),ERCP术后胰腺炎5例(4.5%),11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。在非PAD组中,胃肠道出血1例(0.9%),胃肠道穿孔0例,ERCP后高淀粉样血症18例(16.2%),ERCP后胰腺炎5例(4.5%),11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。在非PAD组中,胃肠道出血1例(0.9%),胃肠道穿孔0例,ERCP后高淀粉样血症18例(16.2%),ERCP后胰腺炎5例(4.5%),11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。5%的人患有ERCP后胰腺炎,11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。5%的人患有ERCP后胰腺炎,11例(9.9%)患有胆道感染。这项回顾性研究表明,在第一节中完全清除CBD结石和应用机械碎石术之间,两组之间存在统计学差异(均P <0.05),但根据总体结石清除率和结石清除率没有统计学差异。并发症(P> 0.05),这意味着我们可以减少PAD对ERCP治疗胆总管结石的影响。

更新日期:2020-07-10
down
wechat
bug