Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Biliary Drainage in Patients With Failed ERCP: Percutaneous Versus EUS-guided Drainage.
Téllez-Ávila, Félix I; Herrera-Mora, David; Duarte-Medrano, Gilberto; Lopez-Arce, Gustavo; Lindoro-Barraza, Dayana; Casanova, Iván; Elizondo-Rivera, Javier; Ramírez-Luna, Miguel; Valdovinos-Andraca, Francisco.
Afiliação
  • Téllez-Ávila FI; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Herrera-Mora D; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Duarte-Medrano G; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Lopez-Arce G; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Lindoro-Barraza D; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Casanova I; Imageology, National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Elizondo-Rivera J; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Ramírez-Luna M; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
  • Valdovinos-Andraca F; Departments of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech ; 28(3): 183-187, 2018 Jun.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29683996
ABSTRACT

AIM:

The goal of the study is to compare the efficacy and safety of bile duct drains guided by endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EGBD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Retrospective comparative study. Patients with obstruction of the bile duct who underwent the EGBD or PTBD procedure and had at least 1 previous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography that failed or was inaccessible to the second duodenal portion were included.

RESULTS:

A total of 90 patients were initially evaluated and 28 were excluded. There were 39 (62.9%) women, with a median age of 55.6 years (range, 22 to 88 y). The etiology of biliary obstruction was malignancy in 35 (56.4%) patients. Differences between EGBD versus PTBD groups were in technical success (90% vs. 78%; P=0.3), clinical success (96% vs. 63%; P=0.04), complications (6.6% vs. 28%; P=0.04), length of stay [6.5 d (range, 0 to 11 d) vs. 12.5 d (range, 6.2 to 25 d)] (P=0.009), and costs 1440.15±240.94 versus 2165.87±241.10 USD (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS:

EGBD is associated with a higher clinical success rate and safety, shorter hospital stays, and lower cost compared with PTBD.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Drenagem / Colestase / Endossonografia Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Drenagem / Colestase / Endossonografia Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article