Subject(s)
Abdominal Wall/pathology , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/pathology , Neoplasm Metastasis/diagnosis , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Abdominal Wall/diagnostic imaging , Aged , Albumins/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Deoxycytidine/administration & dosage , Deoxycytidine/analogs & derivatives , Female , Humans , Neoplasm Metastasis/drug therapy , Paclitaxel/administration & dosage , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , GemcitabineABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Postoperative fluid collections (POFC) have high mortality. Percutaneous drainage (PD) is the preferred treatment modality. Drainage guided by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS-GD) represents a good alternative. The aim of the present study was to compare clinical success and complication rates of EUS-GD versus PD. METHODS: Data collected prospectively were analyzed in a retrospective manner. Patients with POFC from October 2008 to November 2013 were included. All collections were drained percutaneously or by EUS-GD. RESULTS: Sixty-three procedures in 43 patients with POFC were analyzed; 13 patients were drained using EUS-GD and 32 patients with PD. Two patients assigned initially to the PD group were reassigned to EUS-GD. Surgery procedures most often related to the collections were intestinal reconnection, distal pancreatectomy, biliary-digestive bypass, and exploratory laparotomy. Technical success (100% vs 91%; P = 0.25), clinical success (100% vs 84%; P = 0.13), recurrence (31% vs 25%; P = 0.69), hospital stay days (median 22 vs 27; P = 0.35), total costs (8328 ± 1600 USD vs 11 047 ± 1206 USD; P = 0.21), complications (0% vs 6%; P = 0.3), and mortality (8% vs 6%; P = 0.9) were each evaluated in the EUS-GD and PD groups, respectively. In the PD group one death was related to the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GD is as effective and safe as PD in patients with POFC. The advantage of not requiring external drainage and a trend to higher clinical success and lower total costs must be considered.
