| Literature DB >> 29225737 |
Hilal Gülsüm Turan1, Mustafa Özdemir2, Ruşen Acu3, Fahrettin Küçükay4, Fatma Ayça Edis Özdemir2, Baki Hekimoğlu5, Utku Mahir Yıldırım6.
Abstract
AIM: To comparatively evaluate Seldinger and Trocar techniques in the percutaneous treatment of hydatid disease.Entities:
Keywords: Cyst hydatid; Liver; Percutaneous treatment; Seldinger technique; Trocar technique
Year: 2017 PMID: 29225737 PMCID: PMC5714805 DOI: 10.4329/wjr.v9.i11.405
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Radiol ISSN: 1949-8470
Figure 1Type 1 hydatid cyst follow-up examinations conducted one to 1-18 mo after the procedure. A: US image prior to the procedure; B: CT image prior to the procedure; C: US image 6 mo after the procedure, wall thickness and irregularity of the cyst is seemed to be increased; D: US image 12 mo after the procedure, cyst dimension and tension is seemed to be markedly decreased and the contents can could be seen to have solidified; E: US image 18 mo after percutaneous drainage. Cyst can could be seen to have completely collapsed and solidified in the image and a pseudotumor image is formed. US: Ultrasound; CT: Computerized tomography.
Statistical evaluation comparison of the changes in cyst volume between trocar and seldinger techniques (Mann-Whitney U test)
| Method | Mean rank | Lower and upper- median | Mann-Whitney U | Difference | ||
| Trocar | 50 | 50.23 | -165.00 and 97.00 | |||
| 61 | ||||||
| 1236.5 | 0.384 | None | ||||
| Seldinger | 56 | 55.42 | -29.00 and 100.00 | |||
| 70.5 |
Association of the techniques used and rate of complications (χ2 analysis)
| Trocar | Seldinger | Total | ||||
| Development of complications | Yes, | 3 | 10 | 13 | ||
| (%) | 6.1 | 17.9 | 12.4 | |||
| No, | 47 | 46 | 93 | 3317 | 0.069 | |
| (%) | 93.9 | 82.1 | 87.6 | |||
| Total | 50 | 56 | 106 | |||
| (%) | 100 | 100 |
Association of the techniques used and rate of local recurrence (χ2 analysis)
| Trocar | Seldinger | Total | |||
| Local recurrence, | |||||
| present, | 2 | 0 | 2 | ||
| (%) | 4 | 0 | 1.9 | ||
| Local recurrence, | |||||
| none, | 48 | 56 | 104 | ||
| (%) | 96 | 100 | 98.1 | 2330 | 0.215 |
| Total, | |||||
| 50 | 56 | 106 | |||
| (%) | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Association of the techniques used and rate of secondary dissemination (χ2 analysis)
| Trocar | Seldinger | Total | |||
| Secondary dissemination, present, | 0 0 | 1 1.8 | 1 1 | ||
| Secondary dissemination, none, | 50 100 | 55 98.2 | 105 99 | 0.883 | 0.533 |
| Total, | 50 100 | 56 100 | 106 100 |