OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective study was to compare the feasibility, technical success rate and complication between single-step endo-ultrasonography (EUS)-guided and two-step EUS-guided drainage technique for symptomatic pancreatic pseudocyst (PP). METHODS: Twenty-one PP patients with clear intra-cystic fluid that needed to be drained were divided into two groups, depending on the availability of the therapeutic echoendoscope at the time of the procedure: Group 1 (13 patients) underwent a single-step EUS-guided endoscopic drainage and Group 2 (8 patients) underwent a two-step EUS-guided drainage technique. RESULTS: In Group 1 immediate technical success was achieved in 92.3% (12/13); two patients had recurrent PP and both were successfully treated by a second EUS-guided drainage. Clinical success was achieved in all cases. In Group 2 technical success was achieved in 75.0% of the patients (6/8). One patient (12.5%) bled 36 h after the procedure. Five out of 6 patients had long-term success. Clinical success was significantly greater in Group 1 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The technique of single-step EUS-guided drainage was superior to the technique of a two-step EUS-guided drainage technique for PP drainage.
Single-step versus two-step endo-ultrasonography-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst / Mangiavillano, B; Arcidiacono, Pg; Masci, E; Mariani, A; Petrone, Mc; Carrara, S; Testoni, S; Testoni, PIER ALBERTO. - In: JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE DISEASES. - ISSN 1751-2972. - 13:1(2012), pp. 47-53. [10.1111/j.1751-2980.2011.00547.x]
Single-step versus two-step endo-ultrasonography-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst
Arcidiacono PG;TESTONI , PIER ALBERTO
2012-01-01
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective study was to compare the feasibility, technical success rate and complication between single-step endo-ultrasonography (EUS)-guided and two-step EUS-guided drainage technique for symptomatic pancreatic pseudocyst (PP). METHODS: Twenty-one PP patients with clear intra-cystic fluid that needed to be drained were divided into two groups, depending on the availability of the therapeutic echoendoscope at the time of the procedure: Group 1 (13 patients) underwent a single-step EUS-guided endoscopic drainage and Group 2 (8 patients) underwent a two-step EUS-guided drainage technique. RESULTS: In Group 1 immediate technical success was achieved in 92.3% (12/13); two patients had recurrent PP and both were successfully treated by a second EUS-guided drainage. Clinical success was achieved in all cases. In Group 2 technical success was achieved in 75.0% of the patients (6/8). One patient (12.5%) bled 36 h after the procedure. Five out of 6 patients had long-term success. Clinical success was significantly greater in Group 1 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The technique of single-step EUS-guided drainage was superior to the technique of a two-step EUS-guided drainage technique for PP drainage.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
