| Literature DB >> 30777987 |
Sundeep Singh Saluja1, Siddharth Srivastava2, S Hari Govind1, Amol Dahale2, Barjesh Chander Sharma2, Pramod Kumar Mishra1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies comparing surgical versus endoscopic drainage of pseudocyst customarily include patients with both acute and chronic pseudocysts and the endoscopic modalities used for drainage are protean. We compared the outcomes following endoscopic cystogastrostomy (ECG) and surgical cystogastrostomy (SCG) in patients with acute pseudocyst.Entities:
Keywords: Acute pancreatic pseudocyst; cystogastrostomy; endoscopic; pancreatitis
Year: 2019 PMID: 30777987 PMCID: PMC7176009 DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_109_18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Minim Access Surg ISSN: 1998-3921 Impact factor: 1.407
Figure 1Salient steps in endoscopic cystogastrostomy: (a) Prominent impression seen; (b) impression punctured with knife papillotome; (c) gush of fluid noted; (d) double Pigtail plastic stent placed in the tract
Figure 2Flowchart depicting the management profile of patients with pseudocyst
Baseline characteristics
| Variables | Endoscopic (ECG; | Surgical (SCG; | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | |||
| Range | 11-62 | 15-65 | 0.54 |
| Median | 37 | 37 | |
| Gender | |||
| Male/female | 28/7 | 18/2 | 0.46 |
| Etiology | |||
| Alcoholic | 12 | 9 | 0.18 |
| Biliary | 6 | 7 | |
| Traumatic | 7 | 2 | |
| Idiopathic | 10 | 2 | |
| TLC (cells/cumm) | |||
| Range | 4600-26,100 | 5300-22,400 | 0.003 |
| 4000-11,000 | 27 | 7 | |
| >11000 | 8 | 13 | |
| Haemoglobin (g/dl) | |||
| <6/6-8/>8 | 0/1/34 | 1/0/19 | 1.00 |
| Serum albumin (g/dl) | |||
| <2.8/2.8-3.5/>3.5 | 10/19/6 | 5/9/6 | 0.538 |
| Number of pseudocysts | |||
| Single/multiple | 30/5 | 18/2 | 1.000 |
| Maximum pseudocyst size (cm) | |||
| Range | 6-22 | 8-22 | 0.001 |
| <10/10-20/>20 | 20/12/3 | 2/17/1 | |
| Presence of splenic vein compression | |||
| Yes/no | 3/32 | 2/18 | 1.00 |
| Presence of necrosis | |||
| Yes#/no | 11/24 | 14/6 | 0.01 |
#Classified as WON as per recent Atlanta classification. WON: Walled off necrosis, ECG: Endoscopic cystogastrostomy, SCG: Surgical cystogastrostomy, TLC: Total leucocyte count
Outcome analysis
| Variables | Endoscopic (ECG; | Surgical (SCG; | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical success, | |||
| Yes | 31 (89) | 20 (100) | 0.28 |
| Successful drainage, | |||
| Yes | 27 (78) | 20 (100) | 0.04 |
| Length of hospital stay (days) | |||
| Mean (range) | 6.5 (2-12) | 5 (3-12) | 0.22 |
| Complications | |||
| Sepsis (inadequate drainage) | 6 | 0 | 0.17 |
| Gastric perforation | 3 | 0 | |
| UGI bleed | 1 | 0 | |
| Wound infection | 0 | 2 | |
| Total | 10 | 2 | |
| Percentage | 28.6 | 10 |
ECG: Endoscopic cystogastrostomy; SCG: Surgical cystogastrostomy, UGI: Upper gastrointestinal
Conversion to surgery in endoscopic group
| Cause for conversion | Surgery done |
|---|---|
| Slippage of guide wire during ECG | Cystogastrostomy ( |
| Sepsis due to inadequate drainage | Cystogastrostomy ( |
| Surgical necrosectomy with external drainage ( | |
| Gastric perforation | Repair of perforation along with external drainage ( |
| Perforation repair along with cystojejunostomy ( |
ECG: Endoscopic cystogastrostomy