PloS one · 2023
Theoretical step approach with 'Three-pillar' device assistance for successful endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yoshida Michihiro, Naitoh Itaru, Hayashi Kazuki, Hori Yasuki, Kato Akihisa, Kachi Kenta, Asano Go, Sahashi Hidenori, Toyohara Tadashi, Kuno Kayoko, Kito Yusuke, Kataoka Hiromi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) has been reported as an alternative procedure for acute cholecystitis but remains a challenging procedure.
AIMS: To elucidate the efficacy of a strategic approach for ETGBD that utilizes a four-step classification system and the optional use of 'Three-pillar' assistance with the following devices: cholangioscopy (SpyGlass DS, SG), a flex-type guidewire (Flex-GW), and a 3-Fr microcatheter (3-Fr Micro).
METHODS: A total of 115 patients undergoing ETGBD were studied retrospectively. Characteristics and technical outcomes were compared between conventional ETGBD technique (Classical ETGBD, N = 50) and strategic ETGBD with optional Three-pillar assistance (Strategic ETGBD, N = 65).
RESULTS: SG-assistance (15/65, 23.1%) was as an excellent troubleshooter in Category 1 (failure to identify the cystic duct [CD] orifice) and Category 2 (failure to advance the GW across the CD takeoff due to unfavorable angle). Flex-GW (19/65, 29.2%) worked for Category 3b (failure of GW access to the GB due to multiple tortuosities). 3-Fr Micro (11/65, 16.9%) was effective for Category 3a (failure of GW access to the GB due to CD obstruction) and Category 4 (failure of drainage stent insertion to the GB). The overall technical success rate was significantly higher for Strategic ETGBD (63/65, 96.9%) compared with Classical ETGBD (36/50, 72.0%) (p = 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Strategic ETGBD, which includes the Three-pillar assistance options of SG in the initial steps, Flex-GW for tortuous CD, and 3-Fr Micro for stenotic CD, achieved a significantly higher success rate than for Classical ETGBD.
AIMS: To elucidate the efficacy of a strategic approach for ETGBD that utilizes a four-step classification system and the optional use of 'Three-pillar' assistance with the following devices: cholangioscopy (SpyGlass DS, SG), a flex-type guidewire (Flex-GW), and a 3-Fr microcatheter (3-Fr Micro).
METHODS: A total of 115 patients undergoing ETGBD were studied retrospectively. Characteristics and technical outcomes were compared between conventional ETGBD technique (Classical ETGBD, N = 50) and strategic ETGBD with optional Three-pillar assistance (Strategic ETGBD, N = 65).
RESULTS: SG-assistance (15/65, 23.1%) was as an excellent troubleshooter in Category 1 (failure to identify the cystic duct [CD] orifice) and Category 2 (failure to advance the GW across the CD takeoff due to unfavorable angle). Flex-GW (19/65, 29.2%) worked for Category 3b (failure of GW access to the GB due to multiple tortuosities). 3-Fr Micro (11/65, 16.9%) was effective for Category 3a (failure of GW access to the GB due to CD obstruction) and Category 4 (failure of drainage stent insertion to the GB). The overall technical success rate was significantly higher for Strategic ETGBD (63/65, 96.9%) compared with Classical ETGBD (36/50, 72.0%) (p = 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Strategic ETGBD, which includes the Three-pillar assistance options of SG in the initial steps, Flex-GW for tortuous CD, and 3-Fr Micro for stenotic CD, achieved a significantly higher success rate than for Classical ETGBD.