首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Endoscopy International Open >Comparison between loop-tip guidewire-assisted and conventional endoscopic cannulation in high risk patients
【2h】

Comparison between loop-tip guidewire-assisted and conventional endoscopic cannulation in high risk patients

机译:高危患者环尖导线辅助和常规内窥镜插管的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: The guidewire biliary cannulation (GWC) technique may increase the cannulation rate and decrease the risk for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. The aim of our multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial was to determine if the use of an atraumatic loop-tip guidewire reduces the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) compared with the standard contrast-assisted cannulation (CC) technique. >Methods: From June 2012 to December 2013, a total of 320 patients who had a naïve papilla and were referred for ERCP were randomly assigned to the GWC group (n = 160) or the CC group (n = 160). GWC or CC was randomly used. In cases of failed cannulation in both arms after crossover, biliary access was attempted with alternative techniques (e. g., dual-wire technique, pancreatic duct stenting, precut). >Results: The biliary cannulation rates were 81 % in the GWC group and 73 % in the CC group (P = n. s.). Following crossover, cannulation was successful in 8 % and 11 % of patients in the GWC and CC groups, respectively. With use of an alternative technique, the cannulation rates were 98 % in the GWC group and 96 % in the CC group, respectively. The rates of PEP were 5 % in the GWC group and 12 % in the CC group (P = 0.027). The post-interventional complication rates did not differ between the two groups. >Conclusion: GWC with the new wire guide is associated with a lower rate of PEP in comparison with the CC technique.Clinical trial reference number:
机译:>背景:导丝胆管插管(GWC)技术可以提高插管率并降低内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)胰腺炎的风险。我们的多中心前瞻性随机对照试验的目的是确定与标准的造影剂辅助插管(CC)技术相比,无创环尖端导丝的使用是否可降低ERCP后胰腺炎(PEP)的发生率。 >方法:从2012年6月至2013年12月,将320例初诊为乳头并接受ERCP的患者随机分配到GWC组(n = 160)或CC组(n = 160)。 GWC或CC被随机使用。如果交叉后双臂插管失败,则尝试使用其他技术(例如双线技术,胰管支架置入术,预切术)进行胆道通路。 >结果:GWC组和CC组的胆管插管率分别为81%和73%(P = n。s。)。交叉后,GWC组和CC组分别有8%和11%的患者成功插管。通过使用替代技术,GWC组的插管率分别为98%和CC组的插管率分别为96%。 GWC组的PEP率为5%,CC组的PEP率为12%(P = 0.027)。两组之间的干预后并发症发生率无差异。 >结论:与CC技术相比,带有新导线导引的GWC与较低的PEP率相关。临床试验参考编号:

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号