Angela Saul1, Miguel Angel Ramirez Luna2,3, Carlos Chan3, Luis Uscanga3, Francisco Valdovinos Andraca2,3, Jorge Hernandez Calleros3, Javier Elizondo2, Felix Tellez Avila2,3. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico. angelasaulp@gmail.com. 2. Department of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico. 3. Pancreas Clinic, National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Pancreatic pseudocysts (PPC) are a complication that occurs in acute and chronic pancreatitis. They comprise 75% of cystic lesions of the pancreas. There are scarce data about surgical versus endoscopic treatment on PPC. The aim of this study was to compare both treatment modalities regarding clinical success, complication rate, recurrence, hospital stay and cost. METHODS: Retrospectively, data obtained prospectively from 2000 to 2012 were analyzed. A PPC was defined as a fluid collection in the pancreatic or peripancreatic area that had a well-defined wall and contained no solid debris or recognizable parenchymal necrosis. Clinical success was defined as complete resolution or a decrease in size of the PPC to 2 cm or smaller. RESULTS: Overall, 64 procedures in 61 patients were included: 21 (33%) cases were drained endoscopically guided by EUS and 43 (67%) cases were drained surgically. The clinical success of the endoscopic group was 90.5 versus 90.7% for the surgical group (P = 0.7), with a complication rate of 23.8 and 25.6%, respectively (P = 0.8), and a mortality rate of 0 and 2.3% for each group, respectively (P = 0.4). The hospital stay was lower for the endoscopic group: 0 (0-10) days compared with 7 (2-42) days in the surgical group (P < 0.0001). Likewise, the cost was lower in the endoscopic group (P < 0.001). The recurrence rate was similar in both groups: 9.5 and 4.5% respectively (P = 0.59). The two recurrences found in the endoscopic group were associated with stent migration, and the recurrence in the surgical group was due to the type of surgery performed (open drainage). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic treatment of PPC offers the same clinical success, recurrence, complication and mortality rate as surgical treatment but with a shorter hospital stay and lower costs.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Pancreatic pseudocysts (PPC) are a complication that occurs in acute and chronic pancreatitis. They comprise 75% of cystic lesions of the pancreas. There are scarce data about surgical versus endoscopic treatment on PPC. The aim of this study was to compare both treatment modalities regarding clinical success, complication rate, recurrence, hospital stay and cost. METHODS: Retrospectively, data obtained prospectively from 2000 to 2012 were analyzed. A PPC was defined as a fluid collection in the pancreatic or peripancreatic area that had a well-defined wall and contained no solid debris or recognizable parenchymal necrosis. Clinical success was defined as complete resolution or a decrease in size of the PPC to 2 cm or smaller. RESULTS: Overall, 64 procedures in 61 patients were included: 21 (33%) cases were drained endoscopically guided by EUS and 43 (67%) cases were drained surgically. The clinical success of the endoscopic group was 90.5 versus 90.7% for the surgical group (P = 0.7), with a complication rate of 23.8 and 25.6%, respectively (P = 0.8), and a mortality rate of 0 and 2.3% for each group, respectively (P = 0.4). The hospital stay was lower for the endoscopic group: 0 (0-10) days compared with 7 (2-42) days in the surgical group (P < 0.0001). Likewise, the cost was lower in the endoscopic group (P < 0.001). The recurrence rate was similar in both groups: 9.5 and 4.5% respectively (P = 0.59). The two recurrences found in the endoscopic group were associated with stent migration, and the recurrence in the surgical group was due to the type of surgery performed (open drainage). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic treatment of PPC offers the same clinical success, recurrence, complication and mortality rate as surgical treatment but with a shorter hospital stay and lower costs.
Authors: A Dávila-Cervantes; F Gómez; C Chan; P Bezaury; G Robles-Díaz; L F Uscanga; M F Herrera Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2004-07-22 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Michael D Johnson; R Matthew Walsh; J Michael Henderson; Nancy Brown; Jeffrey Ponsky; John Dumot; Gregory Zuccaro; John Vargo Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Shyam Varadarajulu; Tercio L Lopes; C Mel Wilcox; Ernesto R Drelichman; Meredith L Kilgore; John D Christein Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2008-06-10 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Shyam Varadarajulu; Ji Young Bang; Bryce S Sutton; Jessica M Trevino; John D Christein; C Mel Wilcox Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 22.682