Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Clin Transl Hepatol ; 11(3): 626-637, 2023 Jun 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36969893

RESUMO

Background and Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance in patients at risk is strongly recommended and usually performed by ultrasound (US) semiannually with or without alfa-fetoprotein (AFP) measurements. Quality parameters except for surveillance intervals have not been strictly defined. We aimed to evaluate surveillance success and risk factors for surveillance failure. Methods: Patients with ≥1 US prior to HCC diagnosis performed at four tertiary referral hospitals in Germany between 2008 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Surveillance success was defined as HCC detection within Milan criteria. Results: Only 47% of 156 patients, median age 63 (interquartile range: 57-70) years, 56% male, and 96% with cirrhosis, received recommended surveillance modality and interval. Surveillance failure occurred in 29% and was significantly associated with lower median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score odds ratio (OR) 1.154, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.027-1.297, p=0.025) and HCC localization within right liver lobe (OR: 6.083, 95% CI: 1.303-28.407, p=0.022), but not with AFP ≥200 µg/L. Patients with surveillance failure had significantly more intermediate/advanced tumor stages (93% vs. 6%, p<0.001), fewer curative treatment options (15% vs. 75%, p<0.001) and lower survival at 1 year (54% vs. 75%, p=0.041), 2 years (32% vs. 57%, p=0.019) and 5 years (0% vs. 16%, p=0.009). Alcoholic and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (OR: 6.1, 95% CI: 1.7-21.3, p=0.005) and ascites (OR: 3.9, 95% CI: 1.2-12.6, p=0.021) were independently associated with severe visual limitations on US. Conclusions: US-based HCC surveillance in patients at risk frequently fails and its failure is associated with unfavorable patient-related outcomes. Lower MELD score and HCC localization within right liver lobe were significantly associated with surveillance failure.

2.
United European Gastroenterol J ; 9(4): 469-477, 2021 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33887119

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Before performing endoscopy to remove prophylactic pancreatic stents placed in patients with high risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP), X-ray imaging is recommended to confirm the stents position in the pancreatic duct. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to investigate the feasibility of prophylactic pancreatic stent detection by transabdominal ultrasonography, to reduce the burden of X-ray imaging, which is currently the golden standard. METHODS: All patients who received a pancreatic stent for PEP prophylaxis were included in the present prospective trial. First, stent position was determined by transabdominal ultrasonography. Afterwards, it was verified by X-ray imaging. Retained stents were removed by esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Dislocated stents needed no further intervention. RESULTS: Fourty-one patients were enrolled in this study. All prophylactic pancreatic stents were straight 6 cm long 5 Fr stents with external flap. All stents were removed between day 1 and 10 (median: 3 days) in all cases. In 34 of 41 cases (83.0%), the pancreatic stent was still in place on the day of examination. Twenty-nine of 34 (85.3%) stents were detected correctly by transabdominal ultrasonography. Overlying gas prevented visualization of the pancreas in 3/41 (7.3%) cases. Sensitivity of sonographic detection of the stent was 93.5% (29/31). Six of seven stents were determined correctly as dislocated by ultrasonography. Here, specificity was 85.7%. A positive predictive value of 96.7% (29/30) was examined. The negative predictive value was 75.0% (6/8). CONCLUSION: Transabdominal ultrasonography detects the majority of prophylactic pancreatic stents. Thereby, it helps to identify patients with an indication for endoscopy sufficiently. X-ray imaging could subsequently be omitted in about 70% of examinations, reducing the radiation exposure for the patient and the endoscopy staff.


Assuntos
Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efeitos adversos , Remoção de Dispositivo , Ductos Pancreáticos/diagnóstico por imagem , Ductos Pancreáticos/cirurgia , Pancreatite/prevenção & controle , Stents , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Humanos , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Estudos Prospectivos , Radiografia , Fatores de Risco , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Ultrassonografia , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA