Pancreatic pseudocyst after pegaspargase treatment in six children.
10.3760/cma.j.cn112140-20220904-00779
- Author:
Jin Bo SUN
1
;
Yong Hui HUANG
2
;
Hong CHANG
2
;
Wei YAO
2
;
Zai Ling LI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Pediatrics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
2. Department of Gastroenterology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Female;
Male;
Humans;
Child;
Retrospective Studies;
Asparaginase;
Polyethylene Glycols/adverse effects*;
Pancreatitis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Pediatrics
2022;60(12):1322-1326
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To investigate the clinical characteristics and treatment of pancreatic pseudocyst after pegaspargase treatment in children. Methods: The clinical data of 6 children with pancreatic pseudocyst after pegaspargase treatment in the Department of Pediatrics in Peking University Third Hospital from July 2018 to February 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Results: There were 4 males and 2 females, and their age of onset was 9.5 (5.8, 13.0) years. The total number of pegaspargase applications was 2.5 (2.0, 3.5) times. The course from the last dose of pegaspargase to the onset of pancreatitis was 11.0 (9.0, 17.2) days, and 42.5 (35.0, 129.5) days from the onset of pancreatitis to the diagnosis of pancreatic pseudocyst. Abdominal pain was the most prominent manifestation of pancreatitis (6/6). All of the 6 children were asymptomatic when pancreatic pseudocyst was noted, and were treated conservatively at first, but one case later developed intermittent abdominal distension or nausea after eating. All the cases had pancreatic pseudocyst enlargement during the conservative treatment. Three children were treated with endoscopic ultrasound-guided transgastric drainage, and the cyst disappeared from 10 days to 4 months after the operation. The other 3 children received endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided transpapillary drainage, but one of them turned to surgery due to pancreatic duct stricture, and in the rest 2 children the cyst disappeared at 1 and 3 months after operation respectively. Regarding safety issues, 1 child who received ERCP-guided transpapillary drainage had acute postoperative pancreatitis, which were improved after treatment, and the other 5 had no complications. Conclusions: Pancreatic pseudocyst after pegaspargase chemotherapy can be asymptomatic in the early stage, and should be diagnosed with a history of pegaspargase treatment and timely imaging examination. Conservative treatment is the first choice for asymptomatic pseudocyst. When the pseudocyst enlarges, different endoscopic drainage treatments are required according to whether the pseudocyst is connected with the main pancreatic duct.
