Comparison of efficacy and safety between percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage in 153 cases of pancreatic pseudocysts / 中华消化杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective To investigate the clinical outcome of pancreatic pseudocyst(PPC)treated with non-surgical methods,and to compare the efficacy and safety between percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage in the management of PPC.Methods From February 2010 to July 2017,clinical data of patients with PPC,who received percutaneous drainage or endoscopic drainage,were retrospectively analyzed.The symptom relief rate,short-term and long-term radiologic remission rate,complication rate, recurrence rate and length of hospital stay were compared between patients treated by ultrasound guided percutaneous drainage(percutaneous group),by endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage(EUS group)and by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography guided transpapillary drainage(ERP group).Two independent samples t test,one-way analysis of variance,non-parametric test and Fisher′s exact test were performed for statistical analysis.Results A total of 153 patients were treated and the operation was successfully conducted in 148 patients(96.7%),of whom 39 were in percutaneous group,73 in EUS group and 36 in ERP group.The median follow-up time was 26 weeks(two weeks to 358 weeks).The symptom relief rate,long-term radiographic remission rate,complication rate,recurrence rate and retreatment rate of percutaneous group,EUS group and ERP group were 87.2%(34/39),79.5%(58/73),80.6%(29/36);81.5%(22/27),88.6%(39/44),66.7%(16/24);17.9%(7/39),28.8%(21/73),16.7%(6/36);15.0%(3/20),13.8%(8/58),10.0%(2/20);and 10.3%(4/39),8.2%(6/73),2.8%(1/36),respectively.There was no statistically significant difference among three groups (all P> 0.05).The short-term radiographic remission rate of ERP group was significantly lower than those of percutaneous group and EUS group(46.7%,14/30 vs 77.1%,27/35 and 87.7%,64/73),and the differences were statistically significant(χ2 =6.442 and 19.450,both P<0.01).The median hospital stay of percutaneous group was longer than those of EUS group and ERP group(14.0 days vs 9.0 days and 8.0 days),and the differences were statistically significant(Z= -3.687 and -2.630,both P<0.01).Conclusions The efficacies of percutaneous drainage and EUS-guided drainage are both better than ERP,and they are effective and safe methods especially for the patients with complication of pseudocysts and necrosis debris in pseudocysts.However,the hospitalization time of percutaneous drainage is longer. In addition,percutaneous drainage can be an alternative method after failed endoscopic drainage.