S Ivanova, N Stanchev, L Dimitrov, A Georgiev, A Mikhova, I Boneva, R Dikova
{"title":"慢性乳突-齿龈炎诊断的临床困难与错误。","authors":"S Ivanova, N Stanchev, L Dimitrov, A Georgiev, A Mikhova, I Boneva, R Dikova","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>138 patients with chronic papillooditis were investigated, 15 of them in a stage of decompensation. In 83.3% of the cases, the diagnosis was not clinically determined (including 68 of 92 endoscoped before their hospitalization--82.9%). 34 patients were diagnosed as having chronic gastroduodenitis, 15--ulcer, 42--chronic cholecystitis, 11--chronic pancreatitis, 4--cholangitis, 9--postcholecystectomic status. All these diseases developed simultaneously with the papillitis. In a second endoscopic check-up with an examination of papilla Vateri, the patients were in all the cases diagnosed without difficulties and the diagnose was confirmed by biopsy. In 21 patients there was confirmed primary papillooditis and in 127--accompanying disorders: chr. gastroduodenitis--29, chr. atrophic gastritis--18, ulcer--15, chr. cholecystitis--42, postcholecystectomic status--9, choledocholithiasis--14, chr. pancreatitis--11. Most often misdiagnosis occurs if: 1) during the routine endoscopic investigation the endoscopist does not examine papilla of Vater; 2) chr. papillitis exists simultaneously with one of the already mentioned diseases that are easier of approach for diagnostics and explanation of the disorders; 3) the clinical picture of papillitis cannot be differentiated from the one of the basic or accompanying disease; 4) the bile drainage is not prevented; 5) the result of the venous biligraphy does not lead to the diagnosis and ERCP is carried out only in a case of a clinical suspicion.</p>","PeriodicalId":23592,"journal":{"name":"Vutreshni bolesti","volume":"31 4","pages":"5-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Clinical difficulties and errors in making a diagnosis of chronic papillo-odditis].\",\"authors\":\"S Ivanova, N Stanchev, L Dimitrov, A Georgiev, A Mikhova, I Boneva, R Dikova\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>138 patients with chronic papillooditis were investigated, 15 of them in a stage of decompensation. In 83.3% of the cases, the diagnosis was not clinically determined (including 68 of 92 endoscoped before their hospitalization--82.9%). 34 patients were diagnosed as having chronic gastroduodenitis, 15--ulcer, 42--chronic cholecystitis, 11--chronic pancreatitis, 4--cholangitis, 9--postcholecystectomic status. All these diseases developed simultaneously with the papillitis. In a second endoscopic check-up with an examination of papilla Vateri, the patients were in all the cases diagnosed without difficulties and the diagnose was confirmed by biopsy. In 21 patients there was confirmed primary papillooditis and in 127--accompanying disorders: chr. gastroduodenitis--29, chr. atrophic gastritis--18, ulcer--15, chr. cholecystitis--42, postcholecystectomic status--9, choledocholithiasis--14, chr. pancreatitis--11. Most often misdiagnosis occurs if: 1) during the routine endoscopic investigation the endoscopist does not examine papilla of Vater; 2) chr. papillitis exists simultaneously with one of the already mentioned diseases that are easier of approach for diagnostics and explanation of the disorders; 3) the clinical picture of papillitis cannot be differentiated from the one of the basic or accompanying disease; 4) the bile drainage is not prevented; 5) the result of the venous biligraphy does not lead to the diagnosis and ERCP is carried out only in a case of a clinical suspicion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23592,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vutreshni bolesti\",\"volume\":\"31 4\",\"pages\":\"5-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vutreshni bolesti\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vutreshni bolesti","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
[Clinical difficulties and errors in making a diagnosis of chronic papillo-odditis].
138 patients with chronic papillooditis were investigated, 15 of them in a stage of decompensation. In 83.3% of the cases, the diagnosis was not clinically determined (including 68 of 92 endoscoped before their hospitalization--82.9%). 34 patients were diagnosed as having chronic gastroduodenitis, 15--ulcer, 42--chronic cholecystitis, 11--chronic pancreatitis, 4--cholangitis, 9--postcholecystectomic status. All these diseases developed simultaneously with the papillitis. In a second endoscopic check-up with an examination of papilla Vateri, the patients were in all the cases diagnosed without difficulties and the diagnose was confirmed by biopsy. In 21 patients there was confirmed primary papillooditis and in 127--accompanying disorders: chr. gastroduodenitis--29, chr. atrophic gastritis--18, ulcer--15, chr. cholecystitis--42, postcholecystectomic status--9, choledocholithiasis--14, chr. pancreatitis--11. Most often misdiagnosis occurs if: 1) during the routine endoscopic investigation the endoscopist does not examine papilla of Vater; 2) chr. papillitis exists simultaneously with one of the already mentioned diseases that are easier of approach for diagnostics and explanation of the disorders; 3) the clinical picture of papillitis cannot be differentiated from the one of the basic or accompanying disease; 4) the bile drainage is not prevented; 5) the result of the venous biligraphy does not lead to the diagnosis and ERCP is carried out only in a case of a clinical suspicion.