RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Mid-size sphincterotomy associated with large balloon dilation is an alternative to wide sphincterotomy to remove complex lithiases. However, which of the two techniques is most effective remains unclear. Hence, we conducted this study to compare both methods prospectively. METHOD: Since January 2012 until March 2014, 133 consecutive patients with complex stones were included. Group A underwent mid-size sphincterotomy associated with large balloon dilation and group B underwent wide sphincterotomy alone. Success rates were assessed for: Extraction of stones, ductal patency rate, the use of mechanical lithotripsy, dose, time and dose per radioscopy area as well as procedure-related complications. RESULTS: Group A comprised 44 patients and group B comprised 69 patients. Overall success rate for extraction was 86.4% in group A and 70% in group B (p = 0.069). In giant lithiasis, effective extraction was 89.3% in group A and 58.6% in group B (p = 0.019). Use of mechanical lithotripsy was 15.9% and 30.4%, respectively (p = 0.142). Total radiotherapy dose was 39.8 mGy vs. 26.2 mGy, respectively (p = 0.134). Complications occurred in 6.8% and 5.5% of the procedures in each group, without significant differences among them (p = 0.856). CONCLUSION: Sphincterotomy plus large balloon dilation is more effective and equally safe than conventional sphincterotomy for the management of giant main bile duct lithiasis.
Assuntos
Colelitíase/cirurgia , Dilatação/métodos , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colelitíase/diagnóstico por imagem , Dilatação/instrumentação , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Litotripsia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica/instrumentação , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Both the endoscopic and the percutaneous approach are widely accepted for the drainage of hilar tumors. Our primary objective was to report on the effectiveness and complications of these procedures. METHODS: Prospective observational analysis of the endoscopic and/or percutaneous management of all hilar tumors treated at a referral hospital from October 2011 until October 2014. Group A included patients treated endoscopically and group B included patients treated with percutaneous drainage. The following variables were assessed: Effective biliary drainage rate, survival time and complications. RESULTS: Group A comprised 40 patients and group B, 22 patients. Overall success rate in achieving effective biliary drainage was 85% in group A and 90.9% in group B (p = 0.78). Five patients required a combined approach. In group A, the rate of effective drainage in patients with Bismuth IV-type tumors was 58.3%, while it was 81.8% in patients in group B (p = 0.44). There was no difference in mean survival between both groups. For group A, complication rate was 11.5%, whereas it was 2.94% for group B (p = 0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic and percutaneous biliary drainage are both effective methods for the palliative treatment of patients with hilar tumors. However, for Bismuth IV-type strictures, percutaneous drainage proved to be safer and more effective.
Assuntos
Neoplasias dos Ductos Biliares/complicações , Ductos Biliares Intra-Hepáticos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Colestase Intra-Hepática/terapia , Drenagem/métodos , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colestase Intra-Hepática/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
ANTECEDENTES Y PROPÓSITO: la esfinterotomía mediana asociada a dilatación con balones de grandes volúmenes es una alternativa a la esfinterotomía amplia en la remoción de litiasis complejas pero no resulta claro cuál de las dos técnicas es más efectiva. Nosotros comparamos ambos métodos de manera prospectiva. MÉTODO: desde enero de 2012 hasta marzo de 2014 se incluyeron en forma consecutiva 133 pacientes con litiasis complejas. Al grupo A se le realizó esfinterotomía mediana asociada a dilatación con balones de grandes volúmenes y al grupo B esfinterotomía amplia. Se evaluaron las tasas de éxito en la extracción de litiasis, tasa de permeabilidad ductal, la utilización de litotripcia mecánica, dosis, tiempo y dosis por área de la radioscopia y complicaciones vinculadas al procedimiento. RESULTADOS: el grupo A tuvo 44 pacientes y el grupo B 69. La tasa de éxito global en la extracción fue de 86,4% en el grupo A y 70% en el grupo B (p = 0,069). En las litiasis gigantes la efectividad en la extracción fue de 89,3% en el grupo A y 58,6% en el grupo B (p = 0,019). El porcentaje de utilización de litotripcia mecánica fue de 15,9% y 30,4%, respectivamente (p = 0,142). La dosis total de radiación fue de 39,8 mGy vs. 26,2 mGy, respectivamente (p= 0,134). Se presentaron complicaciones en el 6,8% y 5,5% de los procedimientos de cada grupo sin diferencias significativas (p = 0,856). CONCLUSIÓN: la técnica de esfinterotomía con dilatación resulta más efectiva e igualmente segura que la esfinterotomía convencional en el manejo de la coledocolitiasis gigante
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Mid-size sphincterotomy associated with large balloon dilation is an alternative to wide sphincterotomy to remove complex lithiases. However, which of the two techniques is most effective remains unclear. Hence, we conducted this study to compare both methods prospectively. Method: Since January 2012 until March 2014, 133 consecutive patients with complex stones were included. Group A underwent mid-size sphincterotomy associated with large balloon dilation and group B underwent wide sphincterotomy alone. Success rates were assessed for: Extraction of stones, ductal patency rate, the use of mechanical lithotripsy, dose, time and dose per radioscopy area as well as procedure-related complications. Results: Group A comprised 44 patients and group B comprised 69 patients. Overall success rate for extraction was 86.4% in group A and 70% in group B (p = 0.069). In giant lithiasis, effective extraction was 89.3% in group A and 58.6% in group B (p = 0.019). Use of mechanical lithotripsy was 15.9% and 30.4%, respectively (p = 0.142). Total radiotherapy dose was 39.8 mGy vs. 26.2 mGy, respectively (p = 0.134). Complications occurred in 6.8% and 5.5% of the procedures in each group, without significant differences among them (p = 0.856). Conclusion: Sphincterotomy plus large balloon dilation is more effective and equally safe than conventional sphincterotomy for the management of giant main bile duct lithiasis
Assuntos
Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica/instrumentação , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica/métodos , Litíase/metabolismo , Litíase/patologia , Pancreatite/complicações , Pancreatite/metabolismo , Protocolos Clínicos/classificação , Colangiografia/métodos , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica/normas , Esfinterotomia Endoscópica , Litíase/complicações , Litíase/genética , Pancreatite/genética , Pancreatite/patologia , Protocolos Clínicos/normas , Colangiografia/instrumentação , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVO: existen dos técnicas válidas para el drenaje de los tumores hiliares: el abordaje endoscópico y el percutáneo. Nuestro objetivo primario fue reportar la efectividad y las complicaciones de estos procedimientos. MÉTODOS: análisis prospectivo observacional referido al manejo endoscópico y/o percutáneo de todos los tumores hiliares intervenidos en un hospital de tercer nivel desde octubre de 2011 a octubre de 2014. El grupo A representó a los pacientes abordados endoscópicamente, y el grupo B incluyó aquellos con drenaje percutáneo. Se analizaron las siguientes variables: tasa de drenaje biliar efectivo, tiempo de sobrevida y complicaciones. RESULTADOS: el grupo A tuvo 40 pacientes y el grupo B 22. La tasa de éxito global en lograr un drenaje biliar efectivo fue del 85% en el grupo A y del 90,9% en el grupo B (p = 0,78). En cinco pacientes se requirió un abordaje combinado. La efectividad del grupo A en el drenaje de pacientes con tumores tipo Bismuth IV fue del 58,3%, mientras que el grupo B alcanzó el 81,8% (p = 0,44). La sobrevida media de los pacientes no presentó diferencias estadísticas entre ambos grupos. En el grupo A la tasa de complicaciones alcanzó un 11,5% mientras que en el B fue de 2,94% (p = 0,41). CONCLUSIONES: el drenaje biliar endoscópico y el percutáneo son métodos efectivos en el tratamiento paliativo de los tumores hiliares. Sin embargo, en estenosis tipo Bismuth IV, el drenaje percutáneo resultó más efectivo y seguro
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Both the endoscopic and the percutaneous approach are widely accepted for the drainage of hilar tumors. Our primary objective was to report on the effectiveness and complications of these procedures. METHODS: Prospective observational analysis of the endoscopic and/or percutaneous management of all hilar tumors treated at a referral hospital from October 2011 until October 2014. Group A included patients treated endoscopically and group B included patients treated with percutaneous drainage. The following variables were assessed: Effective biliary drainage rate, survival time and complications. RESULTS: Group A comprised 40 patients and group B, 22 patients. Overall success rate in achieving effective biliary drainage was 85% in group A and 90.9% in group B (p = 0.78). Five patients required a combined approach. In group A, the rate of effective drainage in patients with Bismuth IV-type tumors was 58.3%, while it was 81.8% in patients in group B (p = 0.44). There was no difference in mean survival between both groups. For group A, complication rate was 11.5%, whereas it was 2.94% for group B (p = 0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic and percutaneous biliary drainage are both effective methods for the palliative treatment of patients with hilar tumors. However, for Bismuth IV-type strictures, percutaneous drainage proved to be safer and more effective