Minimally invasive percutaneous catheter drainage versus open laparotomy with temporary closure for treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome in patients with early-stage severe acute pancreatitis.
10.1007/s11596-016-1549-z
- Author:
Tao PENG
1
;
Li-ming DONG
2
;
Xing ZHAO
3
;
Jiong-xin XIONG
3
;
Feng ZHOU
3
;
Jing TAO
3
;
Jing CUI
3
;
Zhi-yong YANG
4
Author Information
1. Pancreatic Disease Institute, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China. 26006203@qq.com.
2. Pancreatic Disease Institute, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China. limingdong@hust.edu.cn.
3. Pancreatic Disease Institute, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China.
4. Pancreatic Disease Institute, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China. zhiyongyang@hust.edu.cn.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Adolescent;
Adult;
Aged;
Aged, 80 and over;
Catheterization;
adverse effects;
methods;
Decompression, Surgical;
adverse effects;
methods;
Drainage;
adverse effects;
methods;
Female;
Humans;
Intra-Abdominal Hypertension;
complications;
surgery;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures;
adverse effects;
methods;
Pancreatitis;
complications;
surgery;
Postoperative Complications
- From:
Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Medical Sciences)
2016;36(1):99-105
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
This study aimed to examine the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) versus open laparotomy with temporary closure in the treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) in patients with early-stage severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Clinical data of 212 patients who underwent PCD and 61 patients who were given open laparotomy with temporary closure in our hospital over the last 10-year period were retrospectively analyzed, and outcomes were compared, including total and post-decompression intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays, physiological data, organ dysfunction, complications, and mortality. The results showed that the organ dysfunction scores were similar between the PCD and open laparotomy groups 72 h after decompression. In the PCD group, 134 of 212 (63.2%) patients required postoperative ICU support versus 60 of 61 (98.4%) in the open laparotomy group (P<0.001). Additionally, 87 (41.0%) PCD patients experienced complications as compared to 49 of 61 (80.3%) in the open laparotomy group (P<0.001). There were 40 (18.9%) and 32 (52.5%) deaths, respectively, in the PCD and open laparotomy groups (P<0.001). In conclusion, minimally invasive PCD is superior to open laparotomy with temporary closure, with fewer complications and deaths occurring in PCD group.
